The British army took a remarkable and commendable step this month by featuring Trooper James Wharton, an openly gay soldier. While U.S. military officers continue to fret over gays in the military and discharge decorated heroes for their private relations, the British has shown that tough guys can be gay guys.
The British Army, one of the finest military forces in the world, has allowed openly gay and lesbian soldiers to serve and even march in Gay Rights parades in uniform. Recently, Army General Sir Richard Dannatt made history when he became the first army chief to address a Lesbian, Gay, Bi-sexual and Transgender conference.
Our military could once again learn a few things from our English cousins. Likewise, President Obama should stop playing politics with the issue and stand on principle by doing away with the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy. The British have shown that this was nothing to do with military readiness or unit cohesion. It is about prejudice disguised as principle by politicians who would rather discharge heroes than fight for their right to serve their nation.
For the full story, click here.
This makes me feel intensely privileged to be British
Are you serious? Don’t you realize that the recognition of reality will ruin our military?
Here! Here!
This is one of those fence sitting calamities. We need to get out of the Gray Area and say yes, they can serve. People need to make decisions and stick with them. Not much gray area when you have an absolute. Well if you drink too much Absolute then you have a lot of gray area.
Indeed, we can learn many lessons from our proud British cousins, first and foremost, the lesson we sought to teach them… “that all men are created equal”
As a proud veteran, and a gay man, I say, “Three Cheers for the Brits!”
I never understood the arguments against gays in the military. I recall hearing something about “unit cohesion” or something like that. It all sounds like some cuckoo theory about gay soldiers hitting on other soldiers that will cause them to lose trust or something? It’s all just mindless non-sense.
Christopher Flournoy that all men are created equal”
No there not honey, some are more well endowed than others. Who are you kidding.
Foo you answered your own question, unit cohesion. Any time other men are cohesionning there units, they can not be preforming thier duties. In which if something was to go wrong they might leave thier buddies behind.
foo,
I’ve heard that stupid stuff also. This is where we need to look around the world and back in time to make the best decision. If another country has managed to have openly gay soldiers there’s no reason for us not to. Same for when our military intergrated by race. We also have dopey ideas about women in combat, although clearly, women are in combat, we just don’t like to admit to this. Time to come to terms with reality.
To all,
Truthfully I wish no one would join the military, (except JAG officers). My husband and I just talked to a young guy from a very small town in Michigan (which has one of the highest unemployment rates in the nation). He was going over there because of what those people did to us. He wasn’t going to get killed. They could put him on the front line because those people needed to pay for what they did to us. It was so clear that he has no idea about combat. He didn’t even pass the test given by the army, so he has to retake it. I’m sure he’ll pass with the recruiter’s help. This guy is cannon fodder for sure. My husband tried to explain a little about combat but got no where. This kid was going over there to kill them people who killed us. We tried hard, but we didn’t get anywhere. My husband shook his hand and I gave him a hug and we both cried in the car.
I can’t tell you how much rage I felt that this govt. will take someone so ignorant, play on his patriotism, lie him in, and use him up. He’s nothing to this govt but a piece of temporarily useful trash. Maybe they’ll have the EATRS pick up his body parts off the battlefield to make some energy off him. I’m really sick of our soldiers and our poor people being sent over to kill and be killed for the sake of the rapacious and evil elites that run this country. It offends me at my core. If people on this blog wonder why I don’t like Obama, think about this encounter, and it might be more understandable.
Jill I am not sure if you are old nuff to remember Vietnam. I could not agree with you more. If you don’t know that was when they quite giving the officers nice shinny lapel pins. They made too good of a target.
Good on you “Soldier” magazine.
I am ashamed to say that they are letting these fagots in the military. The Britchins have always been rather strange lot of people. They dis eat Mary’s Lamb for taking it to school.
But then Pole smoking is one thing, next, they will allow Weed Wiffers/Pot Heads in the military as well.
I am amazed that this could happen in this country. Enough is enough. Fire the Queen and get real men to Job. It would just Blow this country away.
Doesn’t the Israeli army allow gay’s to serve openly?
MTB,
So stand up for you principles such as they are.
Next time you’re in an ER on business, be sure to make sure all the doctors and nurses are straight before consenting to care. You wouldn’t want to catch it, you know, like cooties.
Next time you need a lawyer, make sure they are straight too and make sure to raise Hell if you think the judge is one of those “faggots”. They really like it when you do that. Be sure not to let any gay cops arrest you either. And get real confrontational with them over it. Make jokes about their mustaches and handcuffs. They love that too.
And by all means, don’t let a homosexual willing to defend you with his or her life. Life saved by a “fag” just isn’t worth living, is it? And no one would follow one into battle . . . unless you count people like Alexander the Great. Yeah, those “faggots” have no job worth having in defending the likes of you.
Most of all, I really hope ALL of your children are born homosexual. That would be the most suiting punishment of all. You could have the pleasure of telling your children you don’t love them simply because they are different and feel no guilt at all because they are “faggots”. That way you could see all the hate you’ve projected into the world reflected back to you in their eyes when you’re too old to care for yourself.
It’d be karmic.
And you need some karma because you’re just a hateful little piggy troll, aren’t you? Either that or you just can’t admit to yourself and the world you like to kiss the boys too, but you have absolutely nothing of value to add to the conversation other than hate hate hate.
Either way, thanks for being a disgusting human.
Learning doesn’t happen by positive example alone.
You win today’s Bad Example Award.
Mind That Bird,
Those most afraid of gay people, are usually afraid of themselves. A real straight man wouldn’t be threatened at all about a gay man, less competition for one. for two Google the Spartans, one of the fiercest military people’s ever. Guess what they all had gay lovers. They felt it built cohesion.
Buddha,
Saw all six hours, well without the commercials, of Torchwood Sunday night and I thought it was great. Nice to see two of the three leading characters as being male lovers. Also just finished the first book of a Swords n’ Sorcery trilogy by Richard K. Morgan and two of the three lead heroes are a gay man and a lesbian. Now this magazine cover. What the haters don’t realize is that when our Gay brothers and sisters get their rights our world will be better for it, since this Victorian/Puritanical crap strangles the human spirit.
Mind That Bird, Do you, even with your skewed view of reality have 10 friends and relatives? If so, the probability is that at least one of them is gay and undisclosed. Not feed’n the trolls, just say’n. Think about that the next time your watching soccer with your mates or at the family Christmas feast.
I had a close friend that was against gays serving in the military. He was a veteran and during one of our far ranging discussions he said that he didn’t mind them serving under DADT but, but, to be in a unit with open gays and having them look at you and know that, ‘you know, they might be looking at you in a sexual manner would be seriously disruptive and make ‘straight’ soldiers feel funny’. I just had to LOL and I said to him ‘welcome to a woman’s life, in business, in the service, walking down the street, in school, every day…’ I would never have thought such a seemingly secure man just couldn’t bear the thought of being looked at as a sexual object. How … precious.
Mike,
Glad you liked Torchwood. The main complaint I’ve heard from other viewers on the ground here is that it was depressing (which I can see somewhat). Other than that, I’ve yet to talk to anyone who didn’t enjoy that ride.
lottakatz,
It’s funny that sex and perception are quite complex. I understand the discomfort put upon women when men view them as a sex object despite the circumstances and surroundings. As for me, a man, I always was flattered if gay men seemed to be hitting on me, because that said they found me attractive and it was an ego boost. The guys that are threatened by it are threatened by fears about themselves. So strange but true that what is truly an annoying/degrading situation for a woman, can be uplifting for a men. I’ve been married for three decades and had a lot of relationships before that and I’m still discovering
the intricacy of womanhood. Luckily, and I mean this not in jest or as a proclivity, but I’ve always understood that women had greater depth then men and were far more interesting to be with. That’s not even getting into the sexual aspects of hetero
interrelationships.
“Glad you liked Torchwood.”
Buddha,
Depressing it was, but that was what made it so good. You know that in a real alien scenario such as that, that horrifying decisions can and probably will be made. Those decisions will probably ask sacrifice from others than the leadership of course. The other aspect of it was that Captain Jack, the hero, to me was a real bastard and a cold one at that. Then again though, just how would an immortal act among mortals. The stuff of good Sci-Fi. To me though I would have killed the Ambassador and called the alien’s bluff. Releasing the toxin in the building was to me a sign of weakness and not strength. If the strength was there they could have taken out the Eiffel Tower or the Ferris Wheel as proof of power. There I go on and on again though, but it shows you how engrossed I was, it’s just that I’d like to fantasize myself as a different kind of Superhero. I identify with Bruce Willis in the Die Hard series, Matt Damon as Bourne and/or
Liam Neeson in taken. I’m a take no prisoners type of guy in the fantasy section of my overactive psyche. Don’t even ask about the clowns in power the last 8 years.
Mike,
I’m not sure I agree with you in re the attack as a necessarily a sign of weakness. They are alien and I know we both know this is a large word in context. But here is my logic.
The 4-5-6 obviously had great powers in the biological sciences. But think of their mode of transport and exotic atmospheric requirements. A physical invasion is probably out of the question. They had also been working on the human genome since at least 1965. They came offering trade in vaccines. They had probably left a virus that allowed them to “tune” the children which was a truly horrifying display of power. I don’t think the attack per se was a sign of weakness, but perhaps given what they COULD do, not a very effective tactic. I think it wasn’t so much a mistiming on their part as it was a case of “dumb” aliens. Not stupid but given the nature of their technology, they were probably very far removed from natural childbirth and pair-bonding parenting styles if their species were even inclined to such behaviors in their pre-technological past. They were very alien aliens physically and with a proclivity for self-modification. We have no idea what a pre-technical 4-5-6 is like let alone how they breed. Child bearing and parenting the human way may be naturally abhorrent to them. They may even consume their own offspring on a regular basis if they are explosion breeding cannibals or they may reproduce asexually. The possibilities are limitless.
Maybe they didn’t realize the mental effect of their manipulating the children was probably a far more effective way of gaining our compliance than killing some diplomatic functionaries.
Were I a 4-5-6, I would have ordered every fiftieth child to kill one other child, per day, until the governments agreed to provide the originally specified number – or maybe their tuning technology doesn’t have that granular level of control. That would not preclude them just doing something else like leaving the children on “empty channels” for long periods of time if not indefinitely. The living dead would be a huge drag on societal and mental resources. But then again, given the nature of their technology as displayed, they could have easily killed all or most of the adults and taken all the children as breeding stock assuming they could provide suitable environment. 10% of the adults should be able to round up 95% of the children once they were given the option of compliance or total destruction. In fact, I think they’d be highly motivated to do so.
Then again, some my tactical choices are based on knowing humans albeit begrudgingly part of the species at times. The 10/95 is what I’d call a “raw math” strategy and any species with basic math skill should be able to think along those lines. The thing of this is though is it’s not totally anthropomorphism as the 4-5-6 would have known all about our breeding cycles and habits if they’d mastered our genetics enough to weaponize them. They would know this at a level applicable to tactical and strategic thought. It is anthropomorphic in that they may have a radically different history than us as a species and a knowledge of tactics and strategy is only gained though direct situational experience (or enough information to simulate). If they never had a Battle of Thermopylae, would they know the value of a narrow pass? Would it matter if you’re power to craft viruses was such as theirs if they did? They clearly understood the tactical advantage of hostages on some level as they used it to their benefit. Maybe their tactic WAS logical by their reasoning. But attacking when being told “no way and get the Hell out” was not necessarily a sign of weakness.
Or maybe not.
It is also helpful to keep in mind, not only are they aliens, they are stoned out of their gourds. It could have been literally a stupid choice even by their standards.
Now I agree it would have been weakness if the results had been Capt. Jack leading a 4-5-6 hunt back to whatever Godforsaken pit those things came from and bombarding it to a pulp with asteroids from orbit. That was beyond his power at the present absent help from the Doctor who is famously adverse to wiping out entire species having been forced to do so more than once himself. As it was, the 4-5-6 killed humans with impunity and were well on their way to getting exactly what they wanted. Killing the ambassador and calling their bluff? You know better than that. Is that really a good tactic when your opponent can basically spritz the atmosphere with nasties and do so undetected? I mean I like Bourne and Taken too and when pushed in a certain direction I’m a kick ass first kind of guy, but we’re taking biological warfare here. They wouldn’t have to kill us. They could do worse. Much much worse.
Buddha,
The reaction of the 4-5-6 Ambassador to the initial refusal and then Captain Jacks refusal was clearly portrayed as being stunned a sit kept repeating “You’ve done it before.” This to me connotes bluff. It’s like the guy who robs the same 7-11 twice and is dumbfounded when the third time around he’s facing the owner’s shotgun. The 60′s reaction in Britain led the 4-5-6 to believe, despite the granted psychological differences, that extortion works with humans. The deference in building the containment contraption also reinforced this. The threat in the building worked because the humans had built the containment area to their specifications and presumably there was a mechanism to release the poison. To give an alien species 10% of our children/adults/dolphins on demand would mean the end of human civilization, since within the story’s parameters the universe is teeming with intelligent life. Once the word spreads that we are patsies it’s all over. Some times you gotta roll the dice and/or call the bluff.
In truth all of that 4-5-6 plot was what Hitchcock called the “McGuffin,” a plot device to drive the story. To me the story was the ruthlessness of people in government, especially where state secrets are concerned; the ego driven cowardice of politicians who seek deniability; the star crossed love of Jack and Ianto; Jacks immortality and the implications of his inhumanity due to it; Gwen,the moral center and real kickass of Torchwood and the love of her and Rhys, which is also interesting given that she is the tough one of the pair;
Johnson’s growth from a monster to human; Frobisher’s collapsing as the PM uses him and discards him; and finally the PM’s resemblance to many who occupy seats of power and really believe it’s all about them.
That’s my take, which I don’t offer as better or more logical than yours. I’d never be a great critic because I react viscerally to movies, TV Drama and plays. I’m a character driven kind of guy and lose myself to a degree into the story while it’s on. I cry a lot, or get enrage as the case may be.
Listen I’m so emotional in that regard that I’ve been know to cry at the end of The Little Mermaid and romantic comedy’s. My family and friends make gentle fun of me, but I guess it makes me endearing in some way.
I was thrilled by Taken, glad you liked it, because Liam killed every last one of the deserving bastards, that made it emotionally satisfying for me. When he got his daughter back home, having shown Mom and Stepdad his value I got choked up. To think it was you who said at one point that I’m one of the nicest guys around, that’s on true in respect to normal people, I am ruthless in my dislike for bad people, of course as I define them.
Mike,
My only quibble with that is what you see as bluster from the 4-5-6, I saw as initially confusion (previous dealings had been made) followed by an addict’s anger at realizing he/she/it is being told not only no, but Hell no. The way it was presented, I think both interpretations have merit. I can see your take on what the “real” story was and actually I completely agree as to the focus of the action. It was clearly a McGuffin story. In someways, Torchwood themselves were McGuffin’s in the political intrigue sub-plot. Seeing the PM get told that “I paid a visit to Lois Habiba” was indeed the sweetest scene in the show. THAT gal (I forget her name, Frobisher’s assistant) was a shark. Always eating, never stops swimming. The PM didn’t have a chance once she realized what Frobisher was up to at the end. I’ll have to say I was impressed by the presentation and transformation of Frobisher. He was much more three dimensional than many “spy boss” characters. I am just prone to be a nitpicker on aliens as they are rarely well done. I thought the 4-5-6 were much better than average.
bdaman:
“Foo you answered your own question, unit cohesion. Any time other men are cohesionning there units, they can not be preforming thier duties. In which if something was to go wrong they might leave thier buddies behind.”
no one will ever accuse you of political correctness. very funny!
“I thought the 4-5-6 were much better than average.”
Buddha,
Agreed with this and with your post in toto. Now back to the thread, although I frankly find talking SF more fun.
“was to go wrong they might leave thier buddies behind.”
Really sophisticated stereotyping we’ve got there. One wonders if the predilection for such humor is symptomatic of deep seated fears by the humorist of their own sexuality?
predilection sounds deli-ish-she-o-so. How bout this in case you missed it.
If Pakistan attacks Turkey from the rear, would Greece Help?
bdaman,
That one is at least 50years old? It was awful and unfunny when it was new and age hasn’t made it any better.
“I introduced an amendment to H.R. 3326, now withdrawn, prohibiting the use of funds in this bill to investigate or discharge our dedicated service men and women on the grounds of ‘telling’ their sexual orientation. The Policy Concerning Homosexuality in the Armed Forces – commonly called ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ – provides that a service member can be separated from the Armed Forces for stating that he or she is a homosexual or bisexual. Due to pressure from some of my Congressional colleagues and from the White House, I have withdrawn my amendment. I would, however, like to note that it is most unfortunate that we are not addressing Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell at this time. We should not be appropriating funds to enable qualified service members to be booted out just because they are honest about whom they are.
Due to pressure from some of my Congressional colleagues and from the White House Due to pressure from some of my Congressional colleagues and from the White House
Due to pressure from some of my Congressional colleagues and from the White House Due to pressure from some of my Congressional colleagues and from the White House
http://alceehastings.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=348&Itemid=98