For the past week or so, “Zeo” of the NW Republican blog has had his jock strap in a knot over the prospect of Congress repealing the military’s “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” rule.
To hear Zeo tell it, if DADT is repealed and gays are allowed to serve openly in the US military it will mean the end not only of our armed forces but of America, its economic system and civilization in general.
“If DADT is repealed then the cornerstone of the U.S. military’s support in the nation, the quiet loyalty of tens of millions in the ‘silent majority,’ will likely slowly fade away, like the air being let out of a tire,” he wrote.
And here’s the best part:
“There is an ‘icky-ness’ about homosexuality that affects everything it touches. The close-quarters service in the military makes the prospect of open homosexuals serving with, sleeping with, showering with those to whom they are sexually attracted – in an unnatural way – even more ‘icky.’ The whole disgusting nature of it will likely turn off many Americans.
“Many Americans who now are quiet supporters of the military, including its funding, will simply no longer carry with on that support. Many middle-class American families who once saw the military as a legitimate option for giving their children a strong start in life, will now no longer see it as a possible benefit to them.”
In one of his follow-up comments on his on post, “Zeo” went on to predict that repeal of DADT “will further erode American moral values and thus weaken capitalism. On the other hand, it will energize the sodomites and the radical left.”
Well, the Senate approved the repeal of DADT on Saturday and President Obama has promised to sign it this week, so “Zeo” will soon get to test the validity of his end-of-the-world-as-we-know-it theory.
Meanwhile, however, we ought to thank him for revealing, in an unusually candid fashion, the true motivation of the gay-bashers.
They’re not really against the repeal of DADT because they’re worried it will destroy the military. And they’re not really against gay marriage because they’re worried it will “destroy the institution of marriage.” Those are just rationalizations.
Their real reason is that they think gayness is “icky.” It disgusts them, they don’t like it, they don’t even want to think about it. And because of that they don’t want gay Americans to have the same rights as their non-gay fellow citizens.
It’s just that simple – and just that stupid.
This article appears in Dec 16-22, 2010.
MAKE LOCAL JOURNALISM HAPPEN
Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.
Nicely put. No matter what their protestations, for the vast majority of those who oppose gay rights it really does come down to their deep-rooted irrational disgust. It doesn’t matter how they try to dress it up, when pushed, that’s where they finally go. I posted about this on my husband’s blog (http://hulshofschmidt.wordpress.com/2010/10/17/americas-double-standard-on-affection/) after a ridiculous online exchange with an icky-phobe in a newspaper forum.
I support gays and lesbians. But, close quarters will be uncomfortable. I recently attended a trucking school where I was quartered in an eight bunk room with lesbian drivers. I felt as exposed and uncomfortable as if they had assigned me a bunk in a room for men. When I went on the road for my training with a man, sleeping in the semi, he got to be a problem and I had to ditch the whole situation. Opposite sexual identities need privacy, and that is impossible in many military situations.
It is not just “icky”, it is repulsive and nasty. If you are not gay, just think the act through….OMG!!!!
One of the hopeful reports that’s coming out of this long battle for simple human rights is that an overwhelming percentage of those who’ve actually served alongside men and women they know to be gay support their open inclusion in the military. It seems that proximity is proving to be an effective cure for this irrational fear of supposed icky-ness.
Very few gay and bisexual men and women are willing to stand up and be counted. But with growing social acceptance more than 50 million Americans will soon be coming out of the closet and admit that they enjoy same sex love making. That confession will be bad news for homophobes who will fear leaving their homes after sundown.
I think the entire army should be gay
There have been a lot of “Changes” this admistration has instituted & supported that I did not believe in, but this takes the cake so far. The idea of allowing open homosexuality within the military ranks is the most assinine example of political correctness I’ve ever witnessed. From the time I began my military service in basic training through the time I served on an A-Team in the U.S. Army Special Forces, open homosexuality was correctly deemed to be the one absolute character deficiency least desired to be integrated with combat soldiering.
I could give a shit whether anyone in civilian life is queer or not, but the reality of military service places enough stress upon soldiers learning to adapt to a vast array of varying personality types WITHOUT having to deal with open homosexuals as well!
Unless I miss my guess, the military is going to not only be finding itself losing large numbers of valuable combat soldiers via voluntary discharges, but falling far short of necessary recruitment goals as well.
If queers (“gay” is a tragic misuse of the word) are really interested in performing military service, and are to be allowed the privilege of doing so, they should serve in units specifically designated for their membership, apart from the rest.
I have to admit I really have to chuckle when I think of what General George Campbell Patton would have had to say about the idea of open homosexuals serving in HIS army!
There are valid reasons both for and against the repeal of DADT. Interestingly so many of the citizens who write letters against those that oppose repeal have never served in the military. Hopefully the military will enact the policy carefully so looking back everyone can say it was not big deal. The success or failure of the policy now lies with in many cases older officers who are totally opposed to the repeal.
Lest we forget the origins of the dreadful DADT by Der Schlickmeister.
Gays have been in the military ever since our armed forces totalled more than 15 or 20 soldiers. We’ve had a gay commander-in-chief, so I’m not certain what the big deal is. Those who willingly volunteer to potentially make the ultimate sacrifice for their country should not have to lie about who they are. That is not what our country is about. In the same vien, I’m sure the command structure can come up with some proper construct to maintain a sensible decorum as well.
Thankyou! finally an article that truely explains why some people are bigots when it comes to lgbt people…so many of their arguments fall apart….sadly but unusually eye opening is finally we are seeing the truth and motives…icky is the word i prefer to use for rice pudding or spandex pants…lol!
I have to disagree with Zeo on this one. I’m quite conservative, and against gay marriage, but I support the repeal of DADT. I’ve had plenty of experience being around gays, having one as a roommate even, and found that gays are able to function entirely normally. Just as a straight guy doesn’t look at guys for interest because it just doesn’t work that way for them, gays seem to look at men as belonging to either the gay field or straight field. If a guy is straight, he might as well be a gal in a gay man’s mind.
And I must also disagree with RBHSOregon, because not all of the opposition to gay rights comes from irrational disgust. Please allow that while you don’t agree with the logic the anti-gay marriage groups have doesn’t mean that the logic is entirely without merit.
“If you are not gay, just think the act through….OMG!!!!”
Since I’m not gay, why do I need to think about it at all?
Would someone please answer this question for me? Why would anyone have to tell someone else they are gay?
I’m currently in the military, the United States Army, to be exact. Been in just over 4.5 years. I have served along side many gay and lesbian Soldiers. Even went to Iraq and Afghanistan with a few of them. I saw no difference in their Soldiering techniques than I did with the straight Soldiers. The Army/Military has always claimed to be an EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER. It’s about damn time it finally becomes one. oh and btw, I HAVE a girlfriend. Been into females my whole military career. My COC knows, and they do NOT care, because it does NOT affect the way I lead my Soldiers.
“I have to admit I really have to chuckle when I think of what General George Campbell Patton would have had to say about the idea of open homosexuals serving in HIS army!”
I wonder if Gen. Patton thought T.E. Lawrence (Lawrence of Arabia), Alexander the Great, Julius Caesar and Frederick the Great of Prussia weren’t good soldiers — not to mention the troops of ancient Sparta, whose military not only tolerated but encouraged homosexual relationships within the ranks.
The stereotype that all homosexuals are limp-wristed, mincing pansies is absurd.
Mr. Torpey,
Sorry to nitpick, but Patton’s middle name was Smith, not Campbell.
I get a kick out of this administration taking such enormous credit for getting rid of something perpetrated by Clinton. I never knew Clinton to be the bigot that proponents of DADT are made out to be.
Reply to SillyRabbit0910.
Son, you aren’t in the Army and you’ve never been! Easy give away was the “My COC knows, and they do NOT care, because it does NOT affect the way I lead my Soldiers.” Within the first couple weeks of service, you learn the difference between COC and CO. You also learn that fraternization is not and will not be tolerated.
I also know you’re full of crap, when you made the comment, “I have served along side many gay and lesbian Soldiers.” While there are a small number of bglt in our military, mahy is not a word that would fit.
What happens when an NCO orders an openly gay soldier into a dangerous combat situation and the soldier objects because he feels he’s being discriminated against. After all, the NCO and everyone else will know.
Critic: Huh???
I guess the same thing would happen that would happen if a black soldier or Latino soldier or female soldier did the same thing — he’d be court-martialed.
Still haven’t had anyone answer the question above.
Why would anyone have to tell someone else they are gay?
Groo- Use your brain and get a real argument. First of all, the old policy (as of today) could go into effect if someone else told your commander that you were gay.
Secondly, I can immediately think of multiple scenarios in which it might come up and I haven’t even had any coffee yet this morning. How about: Inviting someone over for dinner. Talking about family and children/adoption. If someone asks if you are married.
Seriously, have you never been asked about your personal life by a co-worker? Should someone who is gay be expected to lie when those questions are asked? Does that answer your question?
Hey bendy, thanks for you response, here goes the rebuttal. I doubt the military scenario you used is the way business is done in our armed forces. It would take far more than that to have the old policy go into effect. Sexual orientation usually isn’t mentioned in the same sentence as “Would you like to have dinner with me tonight?”. Family? That’s what it is, family, not the military. Child adoption? That would be a private matter and the process would be handled outside the military because I really doubt military personel are allowed to adopt children. Even if they are able to, it would still be a private process. The answer to “Are you married?”, is yes or no, nothing more, nothing less. Co-worker? A person should be very careful talking to any co-worker about anything sexual. Have you had that cup of coffee yet? Keep trying because I don’t believe you have come up with a reason for anyone in the military to let someone else in the military know they are gay.
Hey Grooo – Bendy is right and you are stuck on two big misconceptions. Being gay is not just about sex and being in the military is not just about combat. I’ll use my brother as an example: he was in the Army for 20 years. He mostly lived and served in Texas and Germany, where he lived on or near base with his wife and kids. He often had other soldiers and their families over for dinner. If he were gay, he would have been denied the simple human dignity of living honestly with his partner, much less having his co-workers over for dinner. “Telling” is not necessarily an overt act.
As I read through these comments I am struck by something Congressman Barney Frank said yesterday when ambushed by a Fucks Emus “reporter” – “You seem to think that there's something extraordinary about gay men showering.”
I would postulate the degree of “ickyness” you creatures experience is in direct proportion to how far into the closet you closet queers are. Something extraordinary about gay men showering, indeed.
For the record, my five ex-wives, nearly twice that children, five and a half grand-children and a pleasantly surprising number of silver haired foxes around here can attest that I am not “gay”. I simply find gays to be “people” too, the vast majority of whom are far more intelligent, better educated and “enlightened” than the vaster majority of adherents to jew/christian/muslim cult of war, bloodshed and male domination.
So you are saying that if someone asks if you are married and you say yes, the conversation would end there. You must be a great conversationalist. Ya just think that any normal person might have a follow-up like, “what is your wife’s name?” If the answer to that question is “Bob” then you would have just ended your career. You missed most of my points. With adoption, my point was that if someone asks if you have kids. You might say yes, I adopted two kids. Why did you adopt? My spouse is the same gender as me. A simple three sentence conversation could have possibly led to a dicey situation with DADT. Bottom line is that yes, a gay soldier doesn’t have to tell anyone that they are gay, but if it comes up in normal conversation, they should be fired for telling the truth. Now, thankfully, they won’t be.
Very well put bendy and I do see the sincerity of your discretion. During the heat of reasoning, right or wrong, a person’s God given right, to live as one chooses, gets trampled on. The repeal of DADT moves us forward in the debate. Both sides will now adjust, reset their feet, for a new battle. Hopefully, both sides will be discreet in their desires.