Gays in the Military, not a Wise Idea

I have been in the military for over 12 years and I will give my view as to why gays should not be allowed in the military.

I respect anyone's lifestyle as long as it does not interfere with mine. I respect the fact that there are gay people that want to serve in the military, they want to do their duty like any patriotic individual would and I do not see a problem with that. The issue that I see is that it would affect the morale and structure of how the military works.

One example is the United States Marines, we have separate boot camp facilities for women and men. They do everything the same, except that they do it separately and the reason is that if they were placed together in training it would be a distraction to what the training is about.

There have been many cases in the Army basic training where problems have arised because male and female trainees perform training together. I do not think there would be anything to discourage an 18 year old male from being distracted from females in the same training.

There would be many instances where open gays in the military would be a distraction. Where would they train? If a female recruit is gay would she train with females, would the other females be comfortable. Same case would be apply for gay males in the military as well. Single bachelor housing would be another issue, there are always two or more sharing rooms when it comes to single military personnel on base, woulld there be peace in that room, I thnk not.

So with all these issues I have to ask. What are the alternatives? Will there be special provisions for gay personnel? Will it be business as usual? There are many things to ponder. I just think it should not happen.

Let me clarify that I in no way would discriminate against gays if they are allowed in the military, would I feel uncomfortable, probably but I would follow my commander in chief rules and regulations even if I do not agree with them


More by this Author

  • USMC Drill Instructors
    13

    USMC Drill Instructors are without a doubt some of the most proffessional Marines you will find on this planet. You may ask just about anyone in the Marine corps if they remember their Drill Instructors and you sure...

  • US Marine Corps Lifestyle Should you Join?
    581

    I know in the past few years the economy has been terrible and recruiting was very good due to the war in Iraq. The Iraq war is now over and Afghanistan does not seem like a long commitement for the US military. Budget...


Comments 7 comments

tony0724 profile image

tony0724 7 years ago from san diego calif

Ruben I have Immense respect for you and having the courage to state things as you see them . But watch out for the liberal attack machine my friend ! Best to you .


Ruben Rivera profile image

Ruben Rivera 7 years ago from Colorado, US Author

Thanks for the warning, I have thick skin I can take it.


Ivorwen profile image

Ivorwen 7 years ago from Hither and Yonder

I'm glad to see a military member's opinion on this subject.


spicey17 profile image

spicey17 5 years ago from New Haven, CT

Just an FYI: run-on sentences are rampant in your piece. Look up 'comma splice' and take heed.

Second, there are so many aspects of your piece that reveal a complete ignorance of gay people and the military. First, you seem to suggest that gays would be unwilling or unable to control themselves and would hit on their "straight" counterparts, which would interfere with unity and effectiveness. This assumption reveals a complete lack of awareness of how gay people must live their lives in world that is hostile to them. While you seem to be thinking about this for the first time and naturally understand gay people only via stereotypes and sexual marginalization, gay people have lived THEIR ENTIRE LIVES with THE ACUTE AWARENESS that pursuing someone without absolute certainty of their persuasion is likely to result in a severe attack or death. It is quite similar to how many black folks are aware that white people are everywhere, so watch your move because the consequences are rarely fair. Simply put, the gays are smart enough to know that everyone thinks they are going to rape the guy next to them in the shower, so they are not stupid enough to even want to do it. In fact, they are shocked at how stupid people can be to imagine such foolishness. So your suggestion that "letting them in" (which is flawed because they are already there and have been for a long, long time) would lead to "distractions" is nothing more than a conveniently vague and unprovable excuse. If you need a precedent, look at college women's sports. Lesbians and heteros work out, push themselves, SHARE BEDROOMS, travel, and WIN together without those distractions that you insist are so detrimental to team unity and effectiveness.

If, however, you meant that the gays are going to get in on with other gays during "work time," then you are then naively assuming that gay people are so hypersexual and out of control that they wouldn't know to - like everyone else - pursue each other while on leave. Gay soldiers are there for the same reasons as other soldiers, so if other soldiers can differentiate appropriate times for "romance" vs inappropriate times, why do you assume gays can't? Also, for the record, lesbians have been in the military for DECADES. Any distractions so far?

RE: The barracks: male and female separation is rooted less on "keeping them from humping all day" and much more on PROTECTING THE WOMEN. As a military man, surely you are aware that women in the military are raped at an incredibly alarming rate, primarily because of the old boys' club that ensures that women have no real recourse. Those "walking mattresses," as I know you know women are called in the Marines, are often victims of all the tactics that sexual abusers employ to evade consequences: raise questions about her history, suggest that she wanted it, once you start you can't stop, you know those women, wink, wink. The separate barracks are designed to offer protection from sexual violence, not for the purposes your articles suggests.

So, it looks like you actually offered only one reason why gays shouldn't be in the military, and that was those purported "distractions" that would arise if they had to work or live with heteros. That's it? Even the racists who argued that blacks and Chinese and Japanese and Mexicans should be segregated in the military offered more basis for their stance.


Ruben Rivera profile image

Ruben Rivera 5 years ago from Colorado, US Author

Spicey,

Thanks for the advice on the comma splice. Anyways I will answer your comment.

You wrote:

"you seem to suggest that gays would be unwilling or unable to control themselves and would hit on their "straight" counterparts, which would interfere with unity and effectiveness."

I never said that, and if I did can you please point it out, specifically the part where you say that I said "gays would be unwilling or unable to control themselves", that is ridiculous. Seems like the typical defensive response where words are added to suggest the original comment is full of prejudicism. I only said unity effectiveness would be affected because let's face it, a group of Marines knowing a gay guy is within their grup would probably treat that individual different in the beginning. So yeah the beginning is rough and probably with the right training for the troops and everyone involved everything will be ok, but to say that in my hub I said gays will be hitting on all straight people creating havoc is just plain ridiculous, just like when women were accepted, and all the changes that have occurred there were some rough times in the beinning but in the end it has been accepted, so please don't add words to my article that I never said or suggested.

I just continued reading your comment and you obviuosly got lost or went a completely different path. You mentioned several times or suggest sexual content like when you erroneously think that I think "Gays will be hitting on every straight person" or when you say "The barracks: male and female separation is rooted less on "keeping them from humping all day" and much more on PROTECTING THE WOMEN."

Let me make this very clear my hub IS NOT about not wanting gays because they will be having sex all the time and why allow them in, C'mon I'm not stupid.

My hub is about the fact that that the controversy of publicly allowing gays in the military will cause distraction and a lot of re-organization and is not a good idea during these times of war, so please don't say that I'm suggesting gays in the military is not good because seaxual activity will be out of control and gays will hit on everyone and so on, that is what your comment is all about, too bad you didn't see my point or just didn't want to see it. Yeah the cause for the distractions are way different than what you think I suggested.

Hey don't ask don't tell has been repealed, we got our training and we'll move on.

Take care


spicey17 profile image

spicey17 5 years ago from New Haven, CT

Actually, when you use the male/female separate living and training conditions as an example, you are implicitly arguing that it applies to gays. So, when you say "I do not think there would be anything to discourage an 18 year old male from being distracted from females in the same training" you ARE in fact suggesting that gays wouldn't be able to "not be distracted." If that is not what you are saying, then what is the purpose of that analogy?

Then, you give the analogy of the living quarters. Again, if this is not implicitly suggesting that gays would hit on people, why do you mention it? You fail to actually develop the point, so what else can your reader conclude?

Finally (and most importantly), it seems strange that you would argue that a group would be disallowed from a fundamental right simply because others wouldn't be able to deal with it. You mention: "let's face it, a group of Marines knowing a gay guy is within their grup would probably treat that individual different in the beginning." By your own admission, with the right training, the small-minded and immature/ignorant bigots would finally learn to play nice. Why then persecute the innocent gay dude (since you admit that he is not the problem)? Why not ban the straight guys who would "treat the gay guy differently," which I imagine would qualify at least to some extent as harassment or insubordination, both of which would require punishment for the offender, not the victim?

If a white guy says he isn't comfortable with a black guy in his barrack, it would be heinous discrimination to tell the black guy that he can't join. Your article basically reeks of blaming the gay people for the phobias and sexual-identity issues of straight folks, particularly when you fail to cite a single specific issue or instance to back up your repeated "distractions" claim.

Yes, DADT was repealed, but when you post something out into the world, don't be surprised when someone takes exceptions to the many, many holes in your argument.


Ruben Rivera profile image

Ruben Rivera 5 years ago from Colorado, US Author

Spicey,

I have to say your views are very narrow minded, very defensive to say the least, the purpose of the barracks analogy is the fact that I have heard Marines say that if a gay individual is their roommate they would just leave or not accept it, in no way did I ever say anything about gay people being distracted and trying to hit on their roomates. You obviously want to take this to a very different level, you want to see this in a very defensive stance where you want to make the writer "me" a bigot who thinks gay people are just horny dudes trying to get with everyone; broaden your horizon and see my point without adding or suggesting things I have never said. This article is strictly about the fact that because it is a transition it will be difficult for some and distractons will happen PLEASE NOTE THAT I AM NOT SAYING GAYS WILL BE HAVING SEX ALL THE TIME IN THE BARRACKS.

The distractions will probably be straight guys not wanting to share a room, fights breaking out, people getting disciplined.

You wrote "Finally (and most importantly), it seems strange that you would argue that a group would be disallowed from a fundamental right simply because others wouldn't be able to deal with it. You mention: "let's face it, a group of Marines knowing a gay guy is within their treat that individual different in the beginning.", well let me ask what was the "don't ask dont tell initially for? if not to make sure gays were given the same right as everyone else without scrutiny, so what is your point?

There is not a single incident? Not yet, but I live within the military community and let me tell you the majority of the Marine Corps which is comprised of "18 to 24" year olds will not take the "lets get the gay people join and nothing will happen, everyone will be fine" too good, I've seen it and I've seen suspected gay people just get out because of being outcast or isolated, hey it's reality, even if I say I will make sure I train my Marines to respect and treat everyone with dignity, I know some will just say sure but deep down they will still have that bigotry, prejudism, whatever you want to call it because society taught him that way.

Again broaden your horizon, you seem to be to defensive and not look at the big picture, again let me make it clear it's not about horny gays but consequences and actions from straight guys.

I hope you also do not take exceptions to the many holes on your argument as well, or should I say very narrow minded comment.

Take care

    Sign in or sign up and post using a HubPages Network account.

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    No HTML is allowed in comments, but URLs will be hyperlinked. Comments are not for promoting your articles or other sites.


    Click to Rate This Article
    working