I highly doubt all marines are cool with this. They're just doing what they are told, and doing the best they can. I have no problem with gays but they shouldn't be in the service because they are more likely to have certain diseases, first and foremost depression. I think that puts them at a higher risk of PTSD and thus puts all Americans at risk when they return home. I'm not saying all gays are incapable of serving but there should be stricter mental health screening for everyone with the repeal of DADT so that we don't get mentally ill gays (higher rates of depression) or mentally ill straights that will harass them.

So... good? My understanding was that 99% of servicemen didn't give a fark before the ban was repealed, either, at least according to the internal investigation congress commissioned.

B-b-but readiness! Showers! MEN LOOKING AT OTHER MEN IN ANYTHING BUT A STOIC OR AGGRESSIVELY TERRITORIAL FASHION!!!!!!

To paraphrase a comedian from several years ago, opponents of LGBT people openly serving are more afraid of someone with an M-16 turning to them and saying "who're you calling a f****t" than guys and gals ogling each other, though they certainly seem to obsess over the idea...

Yes but what are the bottom marines saying?

dontpointthatthingatme: I highly doubt all marines are cool with this. They're just doing what they are told, and doing the best they can. I have no problem with gays but they shouldn't be in the service because they are more likely to have certain diseases, first and foremost depression. I think that puts them at a higher risk of PTSD and thus puts all Americans at risk when they return home. I'm not saying all gays are incapable of serving but there should be stricter mental health screening for everyone with the repeal of DADT so that we don't get mentally ill gays (higher rates of depression) or mentally ill straights that will harass them.

Yeah, that contagious depression that comes out of nowhere and has nothing at all to do with the bigotry and ostracism that LGBT people still face in many parts of the continent due to intolerant bigots talking about how they "don't mind" gays but wish they wouldn't be so gay every day.

dontpointthatthingatme: I highly doubt all marines are cool with this. They're just doing what they are told, and doing the best they can. I have no problem with gays but they shouldn't be in the service because they are more likely to have certain diseases, first and foremost depression. I think that puts them at a higher risk of PTSD and thus puts all Americans at risk when they return home. I'm not saying all gays are incapable of serving but there should be stricter mental health screening for everyone with the repeal of DADT so that we don't get mentally ill gays (higher rates of depression) or mentally ill straights that will harass them.

dontpointthatthingatme: first and foremost depression.

A group highly discriminated against and facing pressures to change their biological leanings by religious idiots, family and bigots is likely to have higher rates of depression?
Surprise to me.

so why can't they roll their sleeves up anymore?

Let's ask the Sergeant Major of the Marine Corps what he thinks about repealing DADT. (new window)

johndalek: so why can't they roll their sleeves up anymore?

Heh. I remember the great "How you roll the sleeves of your BDUs, Army vs. Marine" controversy of the 1980's.

Wellon Dowd: Let's ask the Sergeant Major of the Marine Corps what he thinks about repealing DADT. (new window)

Thank you for sharing that. This bears repeating:

"Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution is pretty simple," he told a group of Marines at a base in South Korea. "It says, 'Raise an army.' It says absolutely nothing about race, color, creed, sexual orientation.

"You all joined for a reason: to serve," he continued. "To protect our nation, right?"

"Yes, sergeant major," Marines replied.

"How dare we, then, exclude a group of people who want to do the same thing you do right now, something that is honorable and noble?" Sgt. Maj. Barrett continued, raising his voice just a notch. "Right?"

johndalek: so why can't they roll their sleeves up anymore?

Gays serving openly? Meh. Not being able to roll my sleeves up? THIS IS AN OUTRAGE!

/ya srsly

m2313: dontpointthatthingatme: first and foremost depression.

A group highly discriminated against and facing pressures to change their biological leanings by religious idiots, family and bigots is likely to have higher rates of depression?
Surprise to me.

Killing browns should make up for it. It's a hoot.

dontpointthatthingatme: I have no problem with gays but they shouldn't be in the service because they are more likely to have certain diseases

yah, you are totally relaxed with no problems at all

//diaf bigot

I didn't RTFA, but I wanted to stop in and say the headline made me chuckle.

dittybopper: Heh. I remember the great "How you roll the sleeves of your BDUs, Army vs. Marine" controversy of the 1980's.

Oh God. So do I. I sort of lost track of the thing after I got out. Has the matter been resolved?

Molavian: johndalek: so why can't they roll their sleeves up anymore?

Gays serving openly? Meh. Not being able to roll my sleeves up? THIS IS AN OUTRAGE!

/ya srsly

Same thing going on here.

If one male Marine catches an STD from another male Marine during a battle and has to go to the hospital to receive treatment, does that go in the "casualty not related to combat" column or the "casualty from friendly fire" column in the report?

CSB:

When I was in the Marines the best shot in our unit was gay. As in your gaydar is going to melt down kind of gay. Yet he was the guy you wanted covering your ass (har har) since he could pick a fly off the wall at 500 yards with iron sights. We all got along, went out drinking, and if he broke off from the group at the end of the night to visit a gay club, no worries.

Up until some hick asshole from Alabama transfers into the squad. It took him about 6 weeks to realize the guy was gay and then he went apeshiat. The squad NCO gave him the brush off and basically suggested he go sit in the corner and shut up. He didn't get the message and kept complaining. Went to the Lt who ignored him. Then on to the company commander. At every stage people said "Well we have no evidence and he looks legit to us. Also ha-ha-guy or [other Marine] swears this guy has a girlfriend, so he can't be gay." At the same time our squad began making this guy's life a living hell.

Finally he went off the reservation completely and starting tailing the gay Marine. Figured he'd get photos or something. He finally got the message when after a stakeout he came back to his car, found a block of C4 on the seat and a friendly little message suggesting next time it would be wired to the car's electrical system.

/it wasn't real C4, just the fake stuff you used as a training aid
//dumbass never figured that out
/his ass was transferred out as quickly as possible

LarryDan43: Killing browns should make up for it. It's a hoot.

It seemed to work for them up until Night of the Long Knives right?

Just so we're clear, there hasn't been an outright ban since the pre-Clinton era. After that, gays COULD serve, but had to be discreet about their sexuality (as did heterosexuals).

And stop saying "openly-serving," butt-twangs. It's not the serving they're doing openly; it's the being gay they're doing openly.

Dear, Mr. Top Marine:
We didn't ask.
Sincerely, Fark

/my headline was better

So all these supposed know-it-alls of military matters, these leaders of our best and brightest, the heroes of heroic heroism who hero all of our heroes - the ones who claimed that ending DADT would hurt troop morale or set back training schedules, or reduce combat readiness - are any of them going to face consequences (either official or non) for being so completely wrong?

Or is leading the military like punditry, sports journalism, or being a Republican politician; no matter how wrong you are, no matter in how many different ways you can be wrong, you will always have a job?

cgraves67: If one male Marine catches an STD from another male Marine during a battle and has to go to the hospital to receive treatment, does that go in the "casualty not related to combat" column or the "casualty from friendly fire" column in the report?

I don't know, how do they handle it now when an STD is transferred from one male Marine to another male Marine via a WM?

I've never had a job where I was allowed to choose my co-workers on the basis of whether or not I personally liked them. That includes my four years in the military.

Gays can serve openly now. Get over it.

Wellon Dowd: Let's ask the Sergeant Major of the Marine Corps what he thinks about repealing DADT. (new window)

I wouldn't expect him to say anything else, at least not to anyone except his closest friends in private and strict confidence. A Sergeant Major's job is to be the eyes, ears, and mouth of the Old Man. Spouting the party line to the rank & file is part of his job description, regardless of his personal feelings.

That said, I have to hand it to the Marines for their response to the repeal of DADT.

This is a good way to bring about more acceptance of homosexuality, really rustling the jimmies of lots of social conservatives. That makes me happy.

It's not like the military has a long history of it, why, just read about the ancient Greeks and Romans.

Dr Dreidel: So all these supposed know-it-alls of military matters, these leaders of our best and brightest, the heroes of heroic heroism who hero all of our heroes - the ones who claimed that ending DADT would hurt troop morale or set back training schedules, or reduce combat readiness - are any of them going to face consequences (either official or non) for being so completely wrong?

The morale argument was always the dumbest one I heard. When DADT was in force:

If you were some creepy dude who hits on squadmates, you were gonna get your ass beat. Then discharged out under DADT likely.

Now its:

If you are some creepy dude who hits on squadmates, you are gonna get your ass beat. You will remain in the service though. If you continue to hit on your squad mates the asskickings will continue.

No one really cares who or what you fark as long as you do your job. No one cares if you have a playgirl instead of a playboy under your mattress. If you bring sexual tension or any such crap into the unit you'll make yourself a target for the NCOs and your squadmates. It applies to the hetero dudes that hit on the chicks in the supply company or are constantly bringing bar skanks around. That's about equal as equal treatment gets.

DarwiOdrade: Good thing you have absolutely no evidence to back up your stupidity - that way we can all safely ignore your bigotry and move on.

Yeah, me and the American Psychological Association are bigots. These are people I want on the front lines of combat and to socially experiment with:

Higher rates of major depression, generalized anxiety disorder and substance use or dependence in lesbian and gay youth.

Higher rates of recurrent major depression among gay men.

Higher rates of anxiety, mood and substance use disorders, and suicidal thoughts among people ages 15 to 54 with same-sex partners.

Higher use of mental health services in men and women reporting same-sex partners.

Sounds like A-list recruits there. Don't let facts get in the way of actually examining the ramifications of this experiment. Because we totally need anxious, substance abusing, suicidal marines.

markfara: I've never had a job where I was allowed to choose my co-workers on the basis of whether or not I personally liked them. That includes my four years in the military.

Gays can serve openly now. Get over it.

You mean "The openly-gay can serve now," dumb-dumb.

/major pet peeve

ha-ha-guy: Dr Dreidel: So all these supposed know-it-alls of military matters, these leaders of our best and brightest, the heroes of heroic heroism who hero all of our heroes - the ones who claimed that ending DADT would hurt troop morale or set back training schedules, or reduce combat readiness - are any of them going to face consequences (either official or non) for being so completely wrong?

The morale argument was always the dumbest one I heard. When DADT was in force:

If you were some creepy dude who hits on squadmates, you were gonna get your ass beat. Then discharged out under DADT likely.

Now its:

If you are some creepy dude who hits on squadmates, you are gonna get your ass beat. You will remain in the service though. If you continue to hit on your squad mates the asskickings will continue.

No one really cares who or what you fark as long as you do your job. No one cares if you have a playgirl instead of a playboy under your mattress. If you bring sexual tension or any such crap into the unit you'll make yourself a target for the NCOs and your squadmates. It applies to the hetero dudes that hit on the chicks in the supply company or are constantly bringing bar skanks around. That's about equal as equal treatment gets.


BS. Playgirl is no longer in print.


/CSB: indeed.

dontpointthatthingatme: Higher rates of major depression, generalized anxiety disorder and substance use or dependence in lesbian and gay youth.

Higher rates of recurrent major depression among gay men.

Higher rates of anxiety, mood and substance use disorders, and suicidal thoughts among people ages 15 to 54 with same-sex partners.

Higher use of mental health services in men and women reporting same-sex partners.

This isn't intrinsic to them, it's a result of the bigoted culture they're in. It's not surprising.

dontpointthatthingatme: Sounds like A-list recruits there. Don't let facts get in the way of actually examining the ramifications of this experiment. Because we totally need anxious, substance abusing, suicidal marines.

This isn't a social experiment you dumbass, this is a matter of human rights and repealing discrimination. This is no more a "social experiment" than allowing black people to vote.

Well if Sci-Fi has taught us anything, it's that in the future all military personnel (men, women, gay, aliens, etc) will be thrown together in one big orgy wonderland (Carly Foulkes not included, unfortunately).

vodka: Well if Sci-Fi has taught us anything, it's that in the future all military personnel (men, women, gay, aliens, etc) will be thrown together in one big orgy wonderland (Carly Foulkes not included, unfortunately).

As a species though we lose the ability to produce Raid or Off! though.

dontpointthatthingatme: I highly doubt all marines are cool with this.

Who gives a shiat? Their Commander-In-Cheif is cool with it, if a grunt or indeed anyone under the CIC in the chain of command isn't cool with it tough. Perhaps they shouldn't of signed on the dotted line for military service if they didn't like the idea of serving with women and gays or indeed having to put up with something/conditions they aren't comfortable with at some point in the future.

Service does not garantee citizenship and you wouldn't like to know more.

The regulation governing the repeal of DADT also includes verbiage prohibiting harassment claims by a gay service member on the basis of outed homosexuality, even if they are being directly harassed or hazed in that regard. In effect, nothing is all that different and service members who never cared about gays in the military simply get one more yearly briefing to snooze through, and all the ones that want to get a little gay bashing in on the weekends can still do so provided they obey the age old "Don't get caught" axiom.

dontpointthatthingatme: I highly doubt all marines are cool with this. They're just doing what they are told, and doing the best they can. I have no problem with gays but they shouldn't be in the service because they are more likely to have certain diseases, first and foremost depression. I think that puts them at a higher risk of PTSD and thus puts all Americans at risk when they return home. I'm not saying all gays are incapable of serving but there should be stricter mental health screening for everyone with the repeal of DADT so that we don't get mentally ill gays (higher rates of depression) or mentally ill straights that will harass them.

I'm responsible for compiling the post-DADT repeal status reports for a big chunk of the Marine Corps. All of the opposition was just typical Marine biatching about change. I've been reporting on it for months, both before and after, and have yet to report a single problem. Face it, we're cool with it.

And the fact that the commandant is making these statements while congress is trying to figure out how to hack the military's budget to the bare bones should not be viewed as a flanking maneuver by anyone! Nope. Nothing to see here. Just the most vocal opponent of the change seeing the error of his ways. I'm sure the USMC is just going to welcome the peter puffers with arms wide open!

"MANAMA, Bahrain -"

Correspondent?

And yes, Marine are far more pissed about the sleeves down order. Marines will forget that DADT ever existed before they stop biatching about sleeves down.

Should we even care if people are mad about other people having equal rights? It's equal rights, get over it.