Senate PASSES repeal of DADT
 

NPR
Fuck you John McCain. Elite liberals as well as the majority of every branch of the military, right? Fuck you for flipflopping on this issue so much you're like a dying fish.

All I have to say is ABOUT DAMN TIME.

Amen! I have the worst Senators ever.

http://ui30.gamespot.com/189/stewie_4.gif

http://i529.photobucket.com/albums/d...fs2/r2n53k.gif

http://chzgifs.files.wordpress.com/2010/06/yes.gif

http://img63.imageshack.us/img63/482...zr79749349.gif

http://cache.gawker.com/assets/image...bde74/340x.gif

http://cache.gawker.com/assets/image...80693/340x.gif

Mr. McCain - I'm feeling petty enough not to give him the honorific - has moved the goalposts so many times that I wouldn't be surprised if he thinks that soldiers will start stubbing their toes on the FABULOUS furniture that gays would obviously add to the barracks following the repeal.

http://img263.imageshack.us/img263/3...n2x5973801.gif
http://img816.imageshack.us/img816/9...yay3021917.gif

http://img837.imageshack.us/img837/4...30l0492504.gif

FINALLY! So happy :) ust got home from work, this is the first thing I saw as I switched on my laptop and it made my day :)

Finally! It's one big step out of the Dark Ages.

LOL @ the gifs

But to echo everyone else: about damn time.

The "great damage" I can see are the homophobes who would assault the gays. There were A LOT of these close-minded folks when I served. We knew who the gay people were but they weren't flamboyant or in our faces about it. And because of DADT, those folks never actually "confirmed" that they were.

I'm glad this got repealed, but I hope the military is ready to punish the close-minded jerks who may try attack the gays.


Also, to play devils advocate, another "great damage" would be the morale of being able to trust your fellow service members with your life. Though I personally don't see any difference if they are serving openly because they are the same people as before, but you do have to be able to trust your life in the hands of those you work with.

Sooo...you're saying gay service members can't trust the bigots in the military with their lives?

Sad isn't it?

In reality I do not think this will be a problem beyond a few isolated incidents. Hopefully those are handled appropriately by the command structure. But we have had a few isolated incidents over whether Obama's the legitimate Commander in Chief, so really, nothing would surprise me.

/the last asshat got sentenced.

The only contribution I have to make is to say how totally awesome I think this gif is.

One of my friends was kicked out a few years ago because they found out he was gay. I wanted to text him today how happy I was but I know its a sore subject for him.

So glad this is OVER.

@ the bold - I think a lot of people forget that homosexuals (like every other group) have people on each end of the spectrum. If someone is on the non-flamboyant side, DADT's repeal isn't going to automatically make him/her shift to the other end.

One thing I don't get -- people say having closeted service members keeps everything on the up-and-up. If (general) you are a bigot, how does not knowing make you feel better? Wouldn't you want to know who is and who isn't so you can stay clear of them?

I also wonder how having closeted homosexuals around you at all times doesn't make you gay (since there have been arguments that being around gays/lesbians somehow makes it "rub off" on you), but gay marriage would. I really wish people would think before coming up with ridiculous ideas. That's neither here nor there.

Again, good job to the Senate for getting something right.

It's about damn time!

That's all I have to say.

Lol I have a few more VHPM gifs just waiting for the right threads.

That's totally not what I meant. I didnt know how else to describe that we knew who they were, even though it was "dont ask dont tell" everybody "knew" even if it was just speculation. I did not mean to imply that they were all showy about it.

I'm glad it was repealed, but I still worry about their safety. I worked with some real asshats while I was in the military, and I dont know if the military is ready to step up and take action against bigots if they act like a doofus. THAT is my biggest concern. I have friends who agree that gays should be able to serve but only under DADT, where as prior to DADT, they were asked, and if they said yes, then they werent allowed to serve at all. If the military is going to be hard core about other "rules" being broken, they'd better be ready to punish homophobes who resort to violence.

Sooo you're saying that people would stop trusting someone because of their sexual orientation? Really? What does that have to do with anything? (serious question, i'm not trying to be snarky).

I guess it's like the discussion I had with my kids (which I kinda got in trouble for :o) and one of my kids brought up the idea of gay soldiers not shooting @ the enemy b/c of the attractiveness of the enemy....thus risking the lives of everyone in their company. :rolleyes:

You kind of answered your own question with that example. I don't know the age of your student, but I'm willing to bet there are current armed service members who share that same belief.

If people really believe that, it doesn't say much for our military in general that soldiers would defy their training and mission for something so outrageously ridiculous.

I have nothing but the highest respect for our military, but some of the individuals who serve are complete nut jobs. Yes, I can think of at least a handful of folks that I worked with personally, completely immature, closed-minded wackos, who are probably pitching a hissy fit about this repeal right now. "Oh my god - that guy likes other guys, and i have to sleep in a berthing with him?" nevermind the fact that he's already been doing that for months and months already and nothing has happened. Just because they are allowed to serve openly doesn't mean he's going to hit on you!

Another thing is that as a female in the military - my modesty went out the window....after having a wide open shower area in boot camp, you kind of lose all sense of modesty. In fact, when I got to college and went to the gym on campus, I would be in the gym just changing like it was no big deal, and as I looked around I realized other ladies were going into the bathroom stalls to change, rather than by the lockers, which I thought was weird.

Again, I dont know why, they've already been serving with gay personnel for however many years now, but somehow, the knowledge of it changes the dynamics....I mean, if it didn't, there would have never been a DADT, right? It's the knowledge of knowing they are there - not the fact that they actually are. Because if that were the case, DADT would have never been enacted - anybody who was gay would just not be allowed to serve at all.

That's exactly why DADT was pointless from the moment it was enacted.

That assumes a lot about the reasons DADT was passed. It was seen as a compromise but in reality it was just another lie. Gays served in every war this nation has fought in both before, during, and soon to be after DADT, and there are stories of soldiers who fought along side who knew that their comrade was gay and didn't care before DADT. DADT served primarily the bigots in the legislature and the command structure. The number of soldiers who have been unwillingly outed by DADT makes it clear that someone else was telling.

The people who don't belong are the bigots who are so freaked out by the presence of a gay or lesbian or bisexual person that they lose all ability to hold a gun or follow orders. And if DADT's repeal (and the amending of the UCMJ that will have to follow) causes us to lose those people from service. Good. They're the ones who can't be trusted to watch their fellows' backs.

In essence, the knowledge doesn't make a difference to someone who isn't a bigoted moron. And even bigoted morons can learn better. So, stubborn bigoted morons are the only ones DADT protected, and we can do without them.

^^ I agree. I just hope the military actually punishes those people who deserve to be punished.

I'm fairly confident they will. Maybe not for harassment, which has been a pretty consistent problem, but definitely for physical violence. Ultimately I don't think the command structure will tolerate someone who attacks another soldier for orientation anymore than they will for attacking someone based on race. Particularly since the command structure is as on board with this as the the combat troops are if not more so.

Now, if they could handle sexual assaults better, I'd be ready to stop complaining about them entirely.

Just checked but the new senator from Illinois voted for repeal so I can give him some modicum of credit. I haven't really forgiven him for lying, badly, about his service among other things but he has chipped a tiny hole in that wall.
NYtimes article

I think you're getting the poll results confused. Around 60% of combat troops believe that the repeal of DADT would hurt troop morale and hinder operations. The support troops ( medical, services, logistics, civil engineering, communications) are the ones who think that the repeal would have little to no repercussions.

ETA- I wouldn't necessarily say that the "Command Structure" is on board with this. Yeah, Gates and the Joint Chiefs may be on board but for the average troop the only chain of command that really matters/affects them is their own unit/brigade/squadron/wing Commander who could be a total homophobe.

That number ranges from 40-60% of "Marine corps and various combat specialties" troops depending on what branch you're talking about so only quoting the high number, which is from the Marines I believe, is misleading. But reread again, I said the command staff is at least as on board with it as the combat troops, if not more so.

And they are more so. If individual commander A is a complete homophobe, he better follow the orders of his superior who isn't. Seriously how is this different from racially integrating the military. If they'd taken a poll then what kind of answer do you think they would have gotten? And it was incredibly successful, even if sometimes an individual is a complete racist.

Although if you want the details here's the complete report:
266 pages, pdf

But that doesn't change the fact that if any member of our military cannot follow orders - for any reason really but particularly- because the thought of a gay service member existing in his unit so enrages her or scares him, they shouldn't be serving.

My concern isn't about troops following or not following orders, but the way the troops treat the service members that are gay. Will they be treated with the respect ad dignity they deserve or will they be subjected to ridicule and harassment? What if the vocal homophobe/evangelical types( I've served with quite a few) demand separate barracks or showers?

I rather epect things to be handled in military order. There is a sexual harassment problem in the military, but primarily from straight males to women, not from gay to straight.

I don't think every gay soldier is going to out his/herself immediately, and I think the majority of them have people in their unit who know already.

Because of the publicity I expect that harassment will be handled fairly quickly and without much leeway as a whole. And as far as I'm concerned the vocal homophobe who demands separate showers can have it pointed out to him that he's been sharing a shower with a gay man this whole time and hasn't been raped yet and he can suck it up and deal with it or trot his ass out of the military altogether.

That said, I'm under the impression, per some military friends, that the number of group showers/barracks are decreasing steadily and have been for a while now.

To the bolded-
A lot(if not most) of sexual harassment involving homosexuals is actually from straight to gay.

For basic training and for most deployed locations group barracks/showers is the norm and only option.

Probably a lot of is is from straight to straight ABOUT being gay actually. And look into the numbers of sexual harassment against women, it's bad. And sexual assault isn't being handled well either.

Showers: Aye, and that is, to my understanding, changing as well, but more slowly. On the 'front lines' in Iraq it may make sense, but "behind the lines" where they cycle off to rest, it's not as necessary, right? They'll manage. It sounds dismissive but really it's just confidence. There's no actual weight behind wanting to sleep in a different room, they're not cuddling naked 3 to a bed or anything. When it comes down to it, if our troops are so scared of a gay person showering with them, they shouldn't be our troops.

I suspect that nothing will really change. As has been previously said, everyone KNOWS who is gay in the military. From my experience in medicine where there is a large number of gay physicians, gay people don't go around telling everyone who'll listen about every part of their personal life. The difference with this bill is that they can't be kicked out of the military if they do talk about it. I doubt very seriously that these service members will suddenly start "gaying it up" because they don't have to worry about being kicked out. They'll go about working in the way they always did, and the heterosexuals that worked with them who always knew they were gay anyway will treat them the same as they always did. As well, they know who are the bigots, and they aren't going to be approaching those guys looking to be best friends.

Exactly. And it's not as if repealing DADT suddenly turned people gay - so the chance that someone was already showering with a gay colleague is likely.

I have a lot of friends in the military, and a lot of friends who are gay and lesbian - it'll be interesting to see where my Venn diagram intersects!

You guys are talking like all military guys are sane :D We are not talking about rational, reasonable, open minded people per se. As Amanda and I have both pointed out, there are some very very very ignorant closed-minded douches in the military. People may suspect/think that you're gay, but because of DADT it's taboo to even mention/joke/make snide comments about it. There are also people who think that DADT=No gays are in the military...seriously!

And our armed forces should be smarter than that.

Seriously.

It is good that this was repealed.

As for the posts about "gaying it up" and whether homosexuals and bisexuals even want to talk about sexual orientation:

Homosexuals want to feel comfortable expressing themselves just as heterosexuals do. Heterocentrism makes heterosexuality the normative and dominant group. This makes heterosexuals comfortable with their sexual orientation to the point where it is second nature. Something simple as saying "I can't wait to go home, I miss spending time with my husband" or "before I was deployed, I met this really wonderful woman" is about sexual orientation. [And, yes, people in the military also engage in small talk (among other things) and, no, most people in the military are not actively fighting in the wars or currently hiding from enemy fire.] It is institutionalized that heterosexuals can feel comfortable inserting (no pun intended) and asserting sexual orientation in even the most random places; and assuming that they are around fellow heterosexuals, often times finding out that they are not around heterosexuals causes the initial pause and awkwardness.

So, this topic isn't about homosexuals "gaying it up" and wanting to constantly say "I'm gay, by the way, I'm gay" but instead about having the ability to be comfortable doing what heterosexuals have always done with their sexual orientation. If DADT is repealed but homosexuals still have to refrain from being comfortable with their sexual orientation, it's the same outcome as keeping DADT. It's just like de jure and de facto segregation, the laws don't change behaviors and outcomes.

I'd like to point out that this is NOT over. There are still levels of certification that have to happen. There's a Facebook DADT page that spells this out, but in short, you want to keep President Obama's feet to the fire over this. In an effort to make everyone get along, this could die on the vine.

The part that makes me laugh about all this is the people who think they don't know ANY gay people. It's no big surprise that they think gay people are out there recruiting when they think all gay people are "Just Jack." If you think all gay people are flouncy, I'm sure you WOULD be afraid of allowing those very few Americans into the military to cause mayhem.

But reality has a way of being a lot less interesting than hysterical propaganda.