Posted on 12/18/2010 3:11:51 PM PST by jazusamo
Complete title: Military Should ‘Expressly Prohibit’ Heterosexuals from Using Separate Showers from Homosexuals After Repeal of DADT, Says DOD Working Group
A special Defense Department working group appointed by Defense Secretary Robert Gates has recommended that the military should “expressly prohibit” heterosexuals from using separate showers, bathrooms and bunking facilities from homosexuals when the repeal of the law banning homosexuals from the military goes into effect.
The working group has also recommended that commanding officers be left with the authority to exempt individuals from using the same showers, bathrooms and living facilities as homosexuals, but only on a “case-by-case” basis.
The House voted earlier this week and the Senate voted this afternoon to repeal the military ban on homosexuals, which has often been referred to as “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”
The working group’s Nov. 30 report—“Report of the Comprehensive Review of the Issues Associated with a Repeal of ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’”--concluded that permitting heterosexuals to use separate showers, bathrooms and bunking facilities from homosexuals of the same gender would “stigmatize” homosexuals and be “reminiscent of ‘separate but equal’ facilities for blacks prior to the 1960s.” The working group was co-chaired by Jeh Charles Johnson, the Defense Department’s general counsel, and U.S. Army Gen. Carter F. Ham.
“In the course of our review we heard from a very large number of Service members about their discomfort with sharing bathroom facilities or living quarters with those they know to be gay or lesbian,” said the report. “Some went so far to suggest that a repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell may even require separate bathroom and shower facilities for gay men and lesbians. We disagree, and recommend against separate facilities. Though many regard the very discussion of this topic as offensive, given the number of Service members who raised it, we are obliged to address it.”
The working group said that having homosexuals use different bathrooms and living facilities from heterosexuals would not only create a “logistical nightmare” but would be discriminatory.
“The creation of a third and possibly fourth category of bathroom facilities and living quarters, whether at bases or forward deployed areas, would be a logistical nightmare, expensive, and impossible to administer,” said the report.
“And, even if it could be achieved and administered, separate facilities would, in our view, stigmatize gay and lesbian Service members in a manner reminiscent of ‘separate but equal; facilities for blacks prior to the 1960s,” said the report.
“Accordingly,” the report concluded, “we recommend that the Department of Defense expressly prohibit berthing or billeting assignments or the designation of bathroom facilities based on sexual orientation. At the same time, commanders would retain the authority they currently have to alter berthing or billeting assignments or accommodate privacy concerns on an individualized, case-by-case basis, in the interests of morale, good order and discipline, and consistent with performance of mission.30 It should also be recognized that commanders already have the tools—from counseling, to non-judicial punishment, to UCMJ prosecution—to deal with misbehavior in either living quarters or showers, whether the person who engages in the misconduct is gay or straight.”
The report also said a survey of more than 115,000 active duty service members indicated only 29.4 percent would “take no action” if they were assigned to share an “open bay shower” with a homosexual.
The other 70 percent of service members answered this way when asked what they would do if assigned to an “open bay shower” with someone they believed to be a homosexual: 25.8 percent said they would use the shower at a different time than the homosexual, 17.7 percent said they would talk to a superior to see if they had a different option, 11.1 percent said they would have a discussion with the other person to see how they would handle the situation, 7.9 percent said they did not know how they would handle the situation, 7.0 percent said they would do “something else,” and 1.3 percent said they would talk to a chaplain, mentor or leader about how to deal with it.
The report acknowledged that in focus groups conducted for the working group “a frequent concern expressed by some Service members was personal privacy in settings where they may be partially or fully unclothed in the presence of another Service member they know to be gay or lesbian—for instance, shared showering facilities or locker rooms.”
However, the report concluded that the concerns that heterosexual service members in this regard were based on “stereotypes” about homosexuals and stated that homosexuals have “learned to avoid making heterosexuals feel uncomfortable or threatened in situation [sic] such as this.”
The report argued that heterosexuals and homosexuals shower together “every day” in college and high school gyms and “in professional sports locker rooms” and that it should be no different in the military.
“Here again, we are convinced that separate bathroom facilities would do more harm than good to unit cohesion and would be impracticable to administer and enforce,” said the report. “Concerns about showers and bathrooms are based on a stereotype—that gay men and lesbians will behave in an inappropriate or predatory manner in these situations. As one gay former Service member told us, to fit in, co-exist, and conform to social norms, gay men have learned to avoid making heterosexuals feel uncomfortable or threatened in situation [sic] such as this. The reality is that people of different sexual orientation use shower and bathroom facilities together every day in hundreds of thousands of college dorms, college and high school gyms, professional sports locker rooms, police and fire stations, and athletic clubs.”
The report quoted the adverse sentiments of a number of service members who participated in focus groups where they indicated they did not want to have to shower, use the bathroom or roommate with homosexuals.
“I live in the barracks and I don’t think that it would go over well in that kind of environment,” one service member told a DOD focus group. “I’m concerned about how people would treat that individual.”
“In the privacy side of the thing, they’ll have to make some changes to the current infrastructure, [for example] privacy stalls in the bathrooms,” said another service member.
“I do not have to shower or sleep in a room with men so I do not want to shower or sleep in the same room as a woman who is homosexual,” said a female service member. “I would feel
uncomfortable changing and sleeping as I would if it was a man in the room. I should not have to accept this.”
“Tell him if he hits on me I will kick his - - -!” said another service member who participated in a DOD focus group.
I think this rule, if implemented, would be stupid.
But all around the country, people are showering in open shower areas with homosexuals — most without their knowledge, I imagine. When I go to the gym, I don’t ask around to make sure there aren’t any gay people before I shower.
And of course, the guys in the military have been showering with the DADT gays for a while now. But it isn’t as disturbing when you don’t KNOW, I guess.
Funny how while some people have been working to try to figure out how to minimize the disruption caused by repeal, the real plan of the group seems to be to FORCE the disruption.
If I were black, I’d be pretty pissed at the argument made here. The whole point about racism being WRONG was that skin color is a MEANINGLESS DISTINCTION. But NOBODY can argue that sexual preference is MEANINGLESS. IF you threw a girl into the guy’s shower, most of the guys would be aroused, while they wouldn’t be with other guys.
Same with a homosexual, right? Isn’t that the whole reason we are being forced to do this, because homosexuals are, by their very nature, turned on by seeing naked men, and would be aroused by it, and attacted to the other men when seeing them naked?
In fact, it still seems to me that homosexuals should be kept out of the shower for THEIR OWN GOOD. They shouldn’t be unnecessarily aroused. In fact, repeal SHOULD have fixed THAT problem (while creating all the others). Before repeal, those homosexuals HAD to repress their homosexuality, and try not to get aroused in showers. But now they can just admit they are gay, and take showers separately.
(Note: You can’t have a “gay shower”, because that would be like putting dozens of self-attracted people together. That of course is the unnatural result of homosexuality: no way to divide into non-sexual groupings of greater than 2).
But, why don’t they force males and females to use the same showers?
*****************
Because they know it’s wrong and they also know DADT is wrong. It’s like rape. It’s about the power.
I know it’s not their plan, but it’s a viable solution.
Humans are part of Mother Nature...at least we’re born here.
just sayin’...
IOW all the negative consequences are correct.
this just proves homosexual behavior (practitioners) have no place in the military.
Good call, I hadn’t thought about that.
In anticipation of the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, in 2007, the Pentagon prepared a list of new or reinterpreted nomenclature and practices familiar to many older veterans. The gay EM who supplied Wikileaks sent us a copy just before his arrest. Some of the more interesting items are below.
All marching commands ending in “March” will now end in either “MINCE” or “SWISH,” at the option of the individual issuing the command;
The command “Right dress right,” will be replaced with “Right strapless evening gown, allrighty;”
Due to the distinct possibility that it may be misinterpreted, the command “To the Rear March” will be replaced with “OK, Fellas, Turn Around;”
Marching cadences employing “Jodie” will now replace that archaic appellation with the more metro-sexually appropriate “Brucie:”
The humorous but now out-dated phrase “Drop your c**ks and grab your socks” is to be replaced with “Drop your c**ks and grab the fella’s over there;”
A “Junk on the bunk” inspection will now allow a soldier’s “junk” to actually be displayed on his bunk;
If it will not interfere with “his” duties, a “Latrine Queen” may wear a pair of high heel pumps if they are OD in color;
The rank of “Private” will be replaced with “Newby.”
For those still smoking, as it could lead to serious unit cohesion break-down, the phrase “Field strip that butt” will no longer be used.
As we did deeper into the documents we were provided, we will add other changes.
PS: A bonus INVESTMENT TIP: Buy shares in firms that manufacture SOAP-ON-A-ROPE!
It has everything to do with weakening our military by lawsuits, threats of lawsuits, and creating uncomfortable situations within our uniformed services, and inviting good soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines to leave and be replaced by...(soldiers who will do what they are ordered to do when the order comes down to fire on American citizens who resist the government or the coming New World Order)...
(I filled in my opinion...)
This asinine discussion misses the entire point: people do not want to, and shouldn’t be required to shower with people who are sexually attracted to them. And no amount of denying can change the fact that that is just how it will be, just as if a bunch of straight guys were showering with the women service members.
Talk about a bunch of clueless, PC nitwits in charge of the US military.
If you have the skills, then there is always opportunities at $500-$600 per day + per diem food vouchers
There's always room for a motivated individual willing to do what others can't or will not do. Less PC and more autonomy.
Good point. It's all about which special interest gets to pick from the socialist money tree next in the name of 'fairness'
Give it 2-3 years - they will have PINK TANKS!!! Believe it! Wait till the Army has Gay Pride day! And hey, if the heteros must shower with the gays, why can’t the hetero men shower with the hetero females? HUH?
I have never heard of such faggotry.
Forgive me for being blunt, but it is “for both sexes”, not “for both genders”.
Liberalism/communism/socialism only survives by redefining words. Gender refers - see your dictionary - to the masculinity/femininity of words and has nothing to do with sex. Libs (=gov., media, education, unions, etc.) have given the word an incorrect definition. I refuse to go along with their redefinition/propaganda/brainwashing.
Don’t need to sit down, I’m past being shocked at my age. I only groan. Like the souls of the martyrs under the alter in Revelation, I can only cry, “How long, O Lord, how long?????”
Vote AGAINST any proposed draft! Such an “America” as THAT is not worth defending - indeed, it DESERVES to fall!
So I guess gates put all faggots on the panel?
Seems that a lot of open faggots will meet unfortunate accidents after hitting on normal people
Dumb question: What’s the difference: Gay men are interested in other men; straight men are interested in women; lesbians are interested in women and straight women are interested in men. Why shouldn’t all women be required to bunk with and shower with the men? Uncomfortable with showering with the opposite sex? How is that different than being uncomfortable with showering with someone who is interested in your sex? Argument: Most gays aren’t sexually aggressive toward straights. Well you could make the same argument about straights and the people they are sexually drawn too. Drop off in retention of women in the military well that’s sexism on the part of the women. That’s the argument that’s used if straights would laeve the military because they were forced to live with the gay community.
If we’re going to have sexual equality and non discrimination then it has to apply to all regardless of sex or sexual orientation.
Become aggressive or make the opposite uncomfortable if it’s a straight man and a straight woman it’s sexual harassment. If it’s a straight and a gay we know it’s going to be the straight’s fault in this PC society. The cases should be treated the same with the same standards.
Then he should be very ashamed, wonder why he isn’t?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.