Gays serving openly in the military

[Leopard]

I'm hot for male penguins and I did not choose to be this way.

Disc Junkie -- my ex used to say you were gay for plastic, and she was serious. I mean, she knows me and my go-to-any-lengths-to-swim-in-plastic tactics, and that was all perfectly healthy hobbyist behavior. But you, she said you're gay for plastic.. romantic, erotic ... plastosexual. That shit cracked me UP. "he's gay for plastic isn't he?" hahahaha

new thread..
Plastosexuals Serving Openly on DGR???

[Frank Delicious]

I can confirm that DJ is a plastiophile, he has sent me...pics of him with his plastic.

It's disturbing.

[Leopard]

I can confirm that DJ is a plastiophile, he has sent me...pics of him with his plastic.

It's disturbing.

True.
But the thing is.. she'd sit down with me and steezo and DJ after a round and trade sesh... pretty obvious that we're bout it bout it, but somehow DJ gets called out
it's hilarious cuz I don't understand it


Anyway you sling enough sacks at the elementary school and you're bound to meet the 1 in 1,000,000 9-year-old Spicoli, and that's DJ in a nutshell
inspiring if you ask me

let that kid serve g-d-it!!

[sunspot]

Whoa...someone posted something intelligent on this thread. I agree that saying homosexuality is genetic is a knee jerk, oversimplified classification. The genetics I suspect to be involved in all this nonsense are ones that code for turning on/off certain hormones while we are in the womb. The more we learn about genetics, the less "predetermined" they seem to be. For example, some people carry the gene for certain cancers, but it still takes a certain environmental condition to activate that gene. Its all going to be more complicated than our current understanding, but that's the nature of science, and a good reason to be excited about living in the time period that we do. By the time most of us grow old much more should be understood about this.

If it's in the womb the greater the chance of it being intrauterine influences rather than strictly genetic, which, depending on what is being discussed or analyzed, may be genetically related.

I think this discussion began on the topic of whether one chooses to be homosexual, and whether it is morally right or wrong. I think its pretty obvious that most do not choose this. I won't say all because I look at sexuality as a continuum with a lot of gray area. There are probably people on the line that go one way or another based on very subjective personal experiences. There are however people that are absolutely gay and know this from a young age and never waver. There are many more who don't come to know this until having some experience and growing old enough to rise above fears and insecurity. Being homosexual is a more difficult path no matter how you look at it as it is still against the norm. Morality is a much more individual thing. I personally support pretty much all gay rights. At worst I would hope someone would at least concede that people being gay does them no harm and adopt at least a tolerant attitude.

There is an interesting study done by J. Micheal Bailey and Richard C. Pillard called, "A Genetic Study of Male Sexual Orientation". In this study they found a rate for homosexuality in identical twins at 50 percent. If homosexuality were genetic then the percentage of twins would be 100 percent of shared homosexuality due to the mono-zygote that they shared.

I find it interesting that there are ex-gays and ex-straights, both going from preference to another. Genetically this shouldn't be allowed if it was predetermined, much like color of eyes or hair.

[Frank Delicious]

I find it interesting that there are ex-gays and ex-straights, both going from preference to another. Genetically this shouldn't be allowed if it was predetermined, much like color of eyes or hair.

Do you think a person could be genetically predisposed to being gay or straight but due to social pressure chose to try and be the sexual preference they think others would prefer them to be?

[jsun3thousand]

Whoa...someone posted something intelligent on this thread. I agree that saying homosexuality is genetic is a knee jerk, oversimplified classification. The genetics I suspect to be involved in all this nonsense are ones that code for turning on/off certain hormones while we are in the womb. The more we learn about genetics, the less "predetermined" they seem to be. For example, some people carry the gene for certain cancers, but it still takes a certain environmental condition to activate that gene. Its all going to be more complicated than our current understanding, but that's the nature of science, and a good reason to be excited about living in the time period that we do. By the time most of us grow old much more should be understood about this.

I think this discussion began on the topic of whether one chooses to be homosexual, and whether it is morally right or wrong. I think its pretty obvious that most do not choose this. I won't say all because I look at sexuality as a continuum with a lot of gray area. There are probably people on the line that go one way or another based on very subjective personal experiences. There are however people that are absolutely gay and know this from a young age and never waver. There are many more who don't come to know this until having some experience and growing old enough to rise above fears and insecurity. Being homosexual is a more difficult path no matter how you look at it as it is still against the norm. Morality is a much more individual thing. I personally support pretty much all gay rights. At worst I would hope someone would at least concede that people being gay does them no harm and adopt at least a tolerant attitude.

Well said.

[sunspot]

Do you think a person could be genetically predisposed to being gay or straight but due to social pressure chose to try and be the sexual preference they think others would prefer them to be?

I'm sure. People do what they think other people want them to be. The important part is to remember that because people have certain predispositions doesn't mean that's what they will become or should become. Not all tall people are basketball players, not all short people are jockeys. They have certain dispositions, but that doesn't mean that's what they will become. Even then, the comparison falls short (no pun intended) because being tall and being short are genetic while sexual preference is not as conclusive.

I think in some regard homosexuality is based off of a feeling. There is anecdotal testimonies of homosexuals that say they "felt" that they were different. Being white, black, tall, short, having blonde hair, black hair etc is not derived from a set of feelings or experiences. It's obviously genetic that I'm going to have certain genetic traits that are obvious and not filled with self-discovery. I'm not going to wake up tomorrow and discover that I'm white. The evidence is obvious and can be traced through my genetic outline. Homosexuality is not apparent like that.

People can't change something that is obviously genetic like the color of eyes. Ex-gays and ex-straights have changed their orientation due to other reasons.

There are two personal stories that I know of were two different women went from being straight to gay. One of the women had kids by two different men. One of the men died in car accident, the other man is incarcerated. Since then, the women has turned her attention/interests from men to women, and is now cohabiting with her girlfriend.

The other women that I know of was an Aunt of a girl I use to talk to. She got tired of guys and started dating women.

Obviously there is no set marker of genetics that make it necessary for them to be that way. It boiled down to choice which was influenced by their environment.

[discspeed]

Mostly to Sunspot,

I understand that a percentage of homosexuals have a wishy washy sexuality that can be influenced by environmental factors and at some point experience will influence them to make a choice one way or another. I acknowledge that. What about the good percentage of homosexuals that clearly show that orientation from an early age? Like I said earlier, I think sexuality is a spectrum, not black and white. There are super masculine men, and effeminate men, and same with females. There are also super-gay people. People who everyone knew they would be gay by the time they were 5 years old or earlier. Many gay people fit this description. I work with kids and I have seen this. When my cousin "came out" at 17 (who btw NEVER showed any interest in the opposite sex before coming out) NO ONE in my family was the least bit shocked or surprised. It was still a little awkward as I have a fairly conservative family, but we all half suspected for some time. Some people are born gay. Whether genetic or from hormonal influences in the womb, they come out that way with no choosing involved. The 50% of identical twins sharing homosexuality makes as strong of a case for a genetic influence as it does against it. 50% is still a lot.

BTW, I have a lot of respect for the way you express and support your views. I'm also pretty sure you are a pastor, correct? If you don't mind sharing, how do you counsel those who come to you and are sure they are gay? As I said earlier, my cousin has been raised in the church and has a very strong christian faith. This faith and the way his church has reacted has helped him get through this period of "coming out" in a healthy manner. I'm thankful that he has had that faith and support because I think it has kept him from "going wild" in terms of being promiscuous and putting himself at emotional and physical risk. If his church had taken a more conservative or hard line approach I think it could have sent him in the opposite direction.

[Flipflat]

It would be cool hear what a current (or inactive) member of the military has to say about this whole thing.

I still think that it's one of those issues that you let slide just to avoid the drama it would cause. And by drama I mean an increase of violence against gays, as well as non-physical intimidation. The way things are now are imperfect, but life isn't perfect. Soldiers have enough to worry about as it is. In combat, I'm sure people bond no matter what their sexual orientation is- it becomes unimportant- but it's the idle time that I worry about. I think military society and civilian society are different, and maybe the social rules from one don't work in the other.

Discspeed- I just got to say that it's pretty cool that your cousin's church was so supportive. Religion gets such a bad name sometimes, in the media and whatnot.

[discspeed]

I listened to NPR question some Marines about this issue tonight. Most either said whatever the policy was they'd follow, and they don't care...or its not a good idea. It sounded like they were imagining flamers in the military and others talked like they couldn't trust gays in combat. I think its some bigotry....lets face it, a lot of the guys that join the Marines when young aren't necessarily the most open minded. It seems like how it works right now is that gays that are in the military are open with the people they trust and don't talk about it around the homophobe agros. One guy said that the military would be ready for this when society as a whole was a little more accepting, but as it stands that's not the case.

[Roy]

Saying most marines are closed minded minded bigots is as closed minded as them saying most homosexuals are limp wristed. How many marines do you know that you can say most? I agree with you for the most part, but you can't agrue against generalizations by using other generalizations.

If you ask ten different marines for their opinion, you'll get ten different opinions coming from ten different directions.

If you ask ten different homosexuals for their opinion, you'll get ten different opinions coming from ten different directions.

[discspeed]

Saying most marines are closed minded minded bigots is as closed minded as them saying most homosexuals are limp wristed. How many marines do you know that you can say most? I agree with you for the most part, but you can't agrue against generalizations by using other generalizations.

If you ask ten different marines for their opinion, you'll get ten different opinions coming from ten different directions.

If you ask ten different homosexuals for their opinion, you'll get ten different opinions coming from ten different directions.

Yeah, that's my bad, I should not have made a generalization like that. I'm just thinking about the guys I knew who joined the Marines out of high school and they were pretty macho and homophobic.

[Jesse B 707]

Saying most marines are closed minded minded bigots is as closed minded as them saying most homosexuals are limp wristed. How many marines do you know that you can say most? I agree with you for the most part, but you can't agrue against generalizations by using other generalizations.

If you ask ten different marines for their opinion, you'll get ten different opinions coming from ten different directions.

If you ask ten different homosexuals for their opinion, you'll get ten different opinions coming from ten different directions.

Yeah, that's my bad, I should not have made a generalization like that. I'm just thinking about the guys I knew who joined the Marines out of high school and they were pretty macho and homophobic.

Roy has a good point but out of the 10 or so guys ive known who have joined the service probly 7 of them would fit this stereotype well....just sayin (and i live in northern Cali)

[SkaBob]

The Marines are a special branch in terms of the mental conditioning they instill into their recruits by the time they're out in the field. They produce a far more aggressive soldier that's far more likely to give in to their temper when shit hits the fan.

You have to expect it. Marines are shock troops.

I know of only one person that came out of the Marines well adjusted and not in need of anger management classes, and it was a woman.

I do think out of guys, the ones that say "Yeah, I wanna be a MARINE!" rather than "I want to serve my country", you will find a high incidence of a certain type of personality.

[Beable]

Arguing about whether being gay is a choice or not is a distraction from the real topic. The implication there is that if being gay WAS a choice, it would be OK to discriminate against gays for choosing wrong. At a more basic level, I would argue that the choice of two consenting adults to do whatever they want to each other is no one else's business. Who cares if it's genetic or not? Just mind your own business and let homosexuals do everything that everyone else does.

Comparing homosexuals to pedophiles is fairly offensive. I understand why you were doing it in the context of the genetic debate, but the core problem with pedophilia is that children cannot consent to have sex in our society. There is a power imbalance between adults and children. This power imbalance is not present in a consensual homosexual relationship between two adults.