[General Battuta]

tell THAT to the sacred band

[Flipside]

Heh, the thing is, if in the UK, someone made a joke about Public Schoolboys and Homosexuality, for example, it'd all be taken in good humour, I mean the whole thing is such a gold mine for comedy (for example, seniors in the highest class schools are assigned Freshmen to teach them the ropes, these Freshmen are called 'fags'.. this is true.) it doesn't really state an opinion on the concept of homosexuality, it simply states that (until recently) an all-male environment where older students are assigned fags is a breeding ground for comedic imagery.

There's a reason that 'Hello Sailor' was a catchphrase for homosexuality for a long time, because it was similar all-male environment, all alone at sea for long periods of time, the Navy was victim of joke after joke about it. In many ways, it's kind of an indictator of how times have changed that now people are worrying about the exact opposite...

[Nuclear1]

if we have a little blackface to boost morale it's okay, people need to stop being so offendendableish

For some reason, I don't see an XO onboard one of the most prestigious aircraft carriers making one of those videos while his ship is directly supporting the war effort where some of those "bleeding hearts" or "f*****s" might be fighting and dying for their country is a good morale builder.

Morale, bull****.  It was straight up irresponsible.  None of my squadron commanders or supervisors called members of our unit "f*****s" or bleeding hearts to imply that we would be offended.  This officer's a disgrace to the uniform.

[General Battuta]

if we have a little blackface to boost morale it's okay, people need to stop being so offendendableish

For some reason, I don't see an XO onboard one of the most prestigious aircraft carriers making one of those videos while his ship is directly supporting the war effort where some of those "bleeding hearts" or "f*****s" might be fighting and dying for their country is a good morale builder.

Morale, bull****.  It was straight up irresponsible.

i hope the humor in my statement was self-evident

'gay' is definitely an insult, it's not a description any more than 'that's so black' is

[Thaeris]

Anyone who's been in the military has seen in some shape or form those silly training videos (actual, official training videos, not the junk in question here). And those videos are lame, often 10 years old, and despite any point they make are mockable due to the manner in which they make their point. It's obvious here that the video above was made as a parody of those films. The problem here is the individuals who were making the production. Simultaneously, I can understand the circumstances which warrant their production, and I can lend some empathy in that regard. However, it still lacks integrity, and it's still not appropriate. I'll trust the Navy to sort it out - to Hell with CNN.

[Flipside]

To Quote Carlin:

"There are no bad words, only bad thoughts"

[NGTM-1R]

tell THAT to the sacred band

Pyhrus would like a word with you.

[Dilmah G]

tell THAT to the sacred band

Actually you could probably argue that a warship, a facility operated and administrated by teams of individuals often numbering less than 8-10 would be hampered in effectiveness if team members felt special loyalty to one member of the team that he/she didn't feel for the rest of the team, and such loyalty also hampers the decision making of these individuals when under pressure. Hell, there's a reason that some forces quietly prefer unmarried individuals.

The Sacred Band is a special case, in my opinion, since the unit was constructed basically entirely of lovers, rather than an environment closer to what might be on-board a vessel.

Anyone who's been in the military has seen in some shape or form those silly training videos (actual, official training videos, not the junk in question here). And those videos are lame, often 10 years old, and despite any point they make are mockable due to the manner in which they make their point. It's obvious here that the video above was made as a parody of those films. The problem here is the individuals who were making the production. Simultaneously, I can understand the circumstances which warrant their production, and I can lend some empathy in that regard. However, it still lacks integrity, and it's still not appropriate. I'll trust the Navy to sort it out - to Hell with CNN.

I agree, this also brings back memories of a few rather 'cringe-worthy' videos a bunch of us had to watch when I was a cadet that detailed firearm safety and another one about paying respects to Officers. It seems that the training material produced in the 80's is universally fashionable...

[General Battuta]

tell THAT to the sacred band

Actually you could probably argue that a warship, a facility operated and administrated by teams of individuals often numbering less than 8-10 would be hampered in effectiveness if team members felt special loyalty to one member of the team that he/she didn't feel for the rest of the team, and such loyalty also hampers the decision making of these individuals when under pressure. Hell, there's a reason that some forces quietly prefer unmarried individuals.

you could make this argument, but it applies right now, since the military at this moment - and for many decades - has contained pairs or groups of people busy ****ing each other. it seems to have gotten along fine.

[Dilmah G]

Probably because they're not all doing it. But seriously, if you can give me an example within at least the last sixty years of a pair similar to the Sacred Band functioning effectively (in the sense that the two are in the same section or platoon sized unit, and are in combat), I may reconsider my viewpoint.

Whilst I don't doubt that people like pilots may get into relationships with each other (there was actually quite a nice read a while back about a couple, tanker driver and a fast-jet knuck, who met over Afghanistan, with the hubby tanking from the wife), I highly doubt that A) they survived for long if they were in the same squadron, the specific military legislation regarding that kind of stuff escapes me, and B) they're standing relationships in the same way that the romantic relationships between the blokes in the Sacred Band were. Again, if you can cite a specific example, I may reconsider my viewpoint.

[General Battuta]

you're missing the fundamental point this is about, which is the question of whether gays can operate openly in the military;

I suppose you have to get into the Military attitude though, in many ways it's a different world. I think it needs to be held in mind that these are people who are responsible for keeping each other alive, if they genuinely felt anything beyond a kind of friendly 'clannish' rivalry between them, that wouldn't work.

the notion that allowing gays in will somehow cause an eruption of inter-unit lust is absurd because mixed-sex units have functioned (admittedly with a lot of rape and pregnancy) and there's nothing to suggest that gay people lack the kind of self-control that hets have. they apparently can feel something beyond a kind of friendly clannish rivalry, namely the desire to **** each other's brains out, and still function, even - heavens to betsy - without indulging said desire

on that note

But seriously, if you can give me an example within at least the last sixty years of a pair similar to the Sacred Band functioning effectively (in the sense that the two are in the same section or platoon sized unit, and are in combat), I may reconsider my viewpoint.

i'm not sure what viewpoint is being reconsidered or what kind of example you need, the point here is that coupling has clearly happened in the military forever and yet they still function. even when the penalty was flogging or hanging (like in the british navy) you still got people doing it.

pick any given unit in any period of time and there's probably been some gay sex going on

[Dilmah G]

you're missing the fundamental point this is about, which is the question of whether gays can operate openly in the military;

I must, because that wasn't going through my head at all. Reading back and finding Flipside's earlier post gives a world of context.

the notion that allowing gays in will somehow cause an eruption of inter-unit lust is absurd because mixed-sex units have functioned (admittedly with a lot of rape and pregnancy) and there's nothing to suggest that gay people lack the kind of self-control that hets have. they apparently can feel something beyond a kind of friendly clannish rivalry, namely the desire to **** each other's brains out, and still function, even - heavens to betsy - without indulging said desire

This, I agree with. I'm quite sure I supported this view not too long ago on a similar thread.

i'm not sure what viewpoint is being reconsidered or what kind of example you need, the point here is that coupling has clearly happened in the military forever and yet they still function. even when the penalty was flogging or hanging (like in the british navy) you still got people doing it.

pick any given unit in any period of time and there's probably been some gay sex going on

Fair enough, but I don't believe that it's actually conducive to the functioning of the unit. And I still don't condone relationships within a unit, and that's not a view I'm going to debate.

[General Battuta]

oh i agree, i don't think that ****ing unit members is productive either, not only because of the favoritism introduced but because it pisses off everyone else.

married couples may be a different matter, maybe. if long-term space crews ever get put together they will probably be married folk.

[Dilmah G]

Yeah, I agree, that'd be a good way of doing it.

[Kosh]

oh i agree, i don't think that ****ing unit members is productive either, not only because of the favoritism introduced but because it pisses off everyone else.

married couples may be a different matter, maybe. if long-term space crews ever get put together they will probably be married folk.

All ****ing should be resticted to intra-unit ****ing. Otherwise too many ****ers would have too much ****ing fun which may in turn **** the whole ****ing unit.

the notion that allowing gays in will somehow cause an eruption of inter-unit lust is absurd because mixed-sex units have functioned

To add to this, IIRC the "unit cohesion" arguments were used long ago to keep the military segragated.

EDIT: Yes it was

The army was segregated and denied blacks substantive participation. Similar practices were followed in World War II; integration was considered disruptive to unit cohesion and fighting ability.

[Flipside]

you're missing the fundamental point this is about, which is the question of whether gays can operate openly in the military;

I suppose you have to get into the Military attitude though, in many ways it's a different world. I think it needs to be held in mind that these are people who are responsible for keeping each other alive, if they genuinely felt anything beyond a kind of friendly 'clannish' rivalry between them, that wouldn't work.

the notion that allowing gays in will somehow cause an eruption of inter-unit lust is absurd because mixed-sex units have functioned (admittedly with a lot of rape and pregnancy) and there's nothing to suggest that gay people lack the kind of self-control that hets have. they apparently can feel something beyond a kind of friendly clannish rivalry, namely the desire to **** each other's brains out, and still function, even - heavens to betsy - without indulging said desire

Your actually misreading what I'm saying there, though I can understand why, what I am talking about is referring to the fact that these people might hurl 'playful' insults at each other based on stereotypes, that may even be bad practice, but what it isn't (or at least, what it wasn't intended to be) is the homophobia it seems to be made out as. It's nothing about their personal relationships as such, it's about the fact that just because as XO makes a comment like 'You Gay Flyboys', it doesn't mean he genuinely believes that statement nor particularly cares whether it's true or not.

As I said before, not suitable behaviour for an XO, but trying to remove those kinds of attitudes from the military would be very difficult indeed.

[General Battuta]

right, i don't necessarily disagree with that

[Titan]

Why is everyone getting so pissed off? If someone on board the carrier got pissed off at it, shouldn't it be their problem to go and talk to the CO personally, or file a report or something? If nobody had a problem with it on the boat, accept is as joking to build morale and leave it. Frankly, it isn't the paper's business to fight nonexistant battles.

Plus I might add, the only reason this is such a big deal right now is because people are up in arms over DADT, which is probably why the paper released it now.

[Nuclear1]

Would you feel comfortable talking to an XO that said anyone with problems were "bleeding hearts" or "f*****s"?

[BloodEagle]

I'd be interested in seeing the actual footage, rather than the hackneyed / flame-bait / typical-pseudo-journalistic rubbish of an edit from that link, before I form a solid opinion.

There are also...........simulated sex acts, and what appear to be two female sailors in a shower together.

Yeah, gotta make sure your opinion is firm.

I was referring to the... erm... the editing!    (I meant that I wanted to see it uncut, not necessarily uncensored. [/serious])

Get your mind out of the gutter!    (And, honestly, you can write better euphemisms than that. ;P)

-------------------------

Would you feel comfortable talking to an XO that said anyone with problems were "bleeding hearts" or "f*****s"?

Aside from the video, which appears to be an attempt at humor, there is no indication that this particular XO acts like that.  And in the event that he does,

file a report or something?