Can you spot the gay soldier in this picture?

  • silverfox

    Posts: 3178

    Sep 23, 2010 5:02 AM GMT
    Screenshotjpg2010-09-23at125634AM.png
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 23, 2010 5:22 AM GMT
    icon_eek.gificon_sad.gif
  • commoncoll

    Posts: 1222

    Sep 23, 2010 5:23 AM GMT
    We shall overcome.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 23, 2010 5:27 AM GMT
    I will end.

    Even though the time is now, America is behind a few years.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 23, 2010 5:34 AM GMT
    I get the point.

    As long as the solider is doing their job it shouldn't matter.

    But I have a story and it occurred the other night.

    I work on the flight line with a bunch of "country boys" who some of which are as cultured as a bail of hay. We have a guy who works supply who's not as masculine as the average guy and talks with a lisp, works in supply. He isn't the same job as us but works in our building as support. I know he's gay as he outed himself to me online. Other than that I believe he doesn't hide who he is from anyone nor does he attempt to cover his tracks. When I tell you the country boys have a field day with him some days to and in-front of his face. Not only them some of his co-workers, I feel bad in a sense because what if he were out what would happen then?

    No one has said anything to me as I keep a low profile in general an don't discuss anything with my co-workers. But If DADT were repealed, would I out myself? Would I out myself... Probably not. I see shit like what I described and I don't like it. Ignorance is going to continue regardless if change comes or not. For instance we have people who been in the military for 5+ years asking young troops "what the difference between n***as and n***ers" So long story shot. A DADT repeal may help but it's not really going to make things better for those who are already targeted.
  • jgymnast733

    Posts: 1783

    Sep 23, 2010 5:56 AM GMT
    WOW, that shit is crazy....
    I dont know how you refrain from going postal on those mother fuckers, your a better man than i am......
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 23, 2010 7:54 AM GMT
    I have said this many times and I wondered if Congress has ever pondered the question: Since 1775, how many gay men and women have laid down their lives defending the United States of America, when the United States of America will not pick up a pen to defend them?

    A national shame, and it tears at my heart.....Keithicon_cool.gif
  • Anto

    Posts: 2035

    Sep 23, 2010 8:56 AM GMT
    It's not just keeping quiet about being gay. You are not suppose to engage in any same-sex sexual contact, admission to being gay, or be married or attempt to marry someone of the same-sex while serving, the policy applies 24/7

    Does anyone else really see how invasive and hostile that is to someone being gay? A lot, most people, think DADT is about just keeping being gay to yourself but that is not true at all. You aren't suppose to engage in any sexual activity or admission of being gay anywhere or at anytime in your life while serving in the armed forces - this means in your private life as well: off base, in reserve, whatever.
    Again, you also are not allowed to be married to or attempt to marry someone of the same sex.

    Can you imagine if straight people were told they could not attempt to marry or be married to the opposite-sex, nor ever engage in sexual relations with the opposite sex or reveal attraction to the opposite sex?

    Straight people would think that is COMPLETELY INSANE and not tolerate it at all.

    Sure you can try to hide being gay but what about the military benefits for and importance of relationship with a loved one that is touted as being so important for troop morale? Important for straights but sorry if you are gay?

    It would be one thing if the policy didn't ban being gay outright and benefits but just gave the military legal means to honorable discharge someone for being gay over practical issues like actual disruption of unit cohesion if it occurred. I still think that has problems but it would not be actual outright hostility towards gay people as it is right now.

    I don't understand how someone can be trained to kill another person and handle combat, be broken down and redesigned, take orders, etc but when it comes to tolerating another person's sexuality it's like a soldier's kryptonite?
    That's just bs. If a soldier can't tolerate that then what business do they have being in the military?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 23, 2010 10:49 AM GMT
    Anto saidIt's not just keeping quiet about being gay. You are not suppose to engage in any same-sex sexual contact, admission to being gay, or be married or attempt to marry someone of the same-sex while serving, the policy applies 24/7

    Does anyone else really see how invasive and hostile that is to someone being gay? A lot, most people, think DADT is about just keeping being gay to yourself but that is not true at all. You aren't suppose to engage in any sexual activity or admission of being gay anywhere or at anytime in your life while serving in the armed forces - this means in your private life as well: off base, in reserve, whatever.
    Again, you also are not allowed to be married to or attempt to marry someone of the same sex.

    Can you imagine if straight people were told they could not attempt to marry or be married to the opposite-sex, nor ever engage in sexual relations with the opposite sex or reveal attraction to the opposite sex?

    Straight people would think that is COMPLETELY INSANE and not tolerate it at all.

    Sure you can try to hide being gay but what about the military benefits for and importance of relationship with a loved one that is touted as being so important for troop morale? Important for straights but sorry if you are gay?

    It would be one thing if the policy didn't ban being gay outright and benefits but just gave the military legal means to honorable discharge someone for being gay over practical issues like actual disruption of unit cohesion if it occurred. I still think that has problems but it would not be actual outright hostility towards gay people as it is right now.

    I don't understand how someone can be trained to kill another person and handle combat, be broken down and redesigned, take orders, etc but when it comes to tolerating another person's sexuality it's like a soldier's kryptonite?
    That's just bs. If a soldier can't tolerate that then what business do they have being in the military?


    ^
    |
    |
    this

    You hit the nail on the head. to a point some people get it but for the most part IMHO this is what its about, especially seeing two people i know personally outed and then forced out the military based solely on their sexuality. Repealing DADT wont change how bigots think and react to gay people, but it sure as hell will make it a little easier to serve and would've made my 6 years a whole lot better when I was in.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 23, 2010 11:44 AM GMT
    They lifted the ban in the UK armed forces 10 years ago. I remember feeling a great sense of relief; not because I wanted to shout about my sexuality from the rooftops, but because I knew I was no longer under the threat of discharge from the Service, should my sexuality come to light by accident. You cannot change the culture within the armed forces overnight, but you can be free to live your life with dignity. That is what getting rid of DADT is all about. That it is still in existence, for the sake of 4 lost Senate votes last Tuesday, is both tragic and shameful.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 23, 2010 11:54 AM GMT
    It shows that American is not as great as it thinks it is, and that too many of its inhabitants are neither free (gay soldiers) nor brave (politicians).
  • Little_Spoon

    Posts: 1562

    Sep 23, 2010 11:58 AM GMT
    icon_sad.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 23, 2010 1:42 PM GMT
    Lostboy saidIt shows that American is not as great as it thinks it is, and that too many of its inhabitants are neither free (gay soldiers) nor brave (politicians).



    Great quote Lostboy!
  • Geoedward

    Posts: 657

    Sep 23, 2010 1:56 PM GMT
    silverfox1
    You couldn't have said it or shown it better.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 23, 2010 1:56 PM GMT
    TheGuyNextDoor saidI dunno ,, is he the one squatting down on the top left or the one feelin' the fabric ???
    I can't tell...

    Give us some hints.....icon_cool.gif


    Woooow. You obviously missed the point here.
  • OptimusMatt

    Posts: 1124

    Sep 23, 2010 2:18 PM GMT
    vetteset saidI have said this many times and I wondered if Congress has ever pondered the question: Since 1775, how many gay men and women have laid down their lives defending the United States of America, when the United States of America will not pick up a pen to defend them?

    A national shame, and it tears at my heart.....Keithicon_cool.gif


    One of many.

    America should really focus on championing human rights within it's own borders before it carpet-bombs another country for being just as bigoted.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 23, 2010 2:26 PM GMT
    They were all gay.





    Or straight. (ish)




    Or hispanic or black or irish or whatever.



    Or muslim, mormon, or catholic.



    But they are U.S.
  • trirl

    Posts: 39

    Sep 23, 2010 2:45 PM GMT
    @Silverfox That photo is great messaging.

    I am frustrated that Gaga stole so much airtime for this fight in the last few weeks. While her support is great, her's is the wrong voice for the people that need to be targeted; older people and moderate republicans.

    Ultimately this comes down to votes in the senate, public opinion has already turned.
  • rnch

    Posts: 11524

    Sep 23, 2010 2:49 PM GMT
    an alternative title for this pic could be "how many gay sholdiers are in this pic?"

    icon_sad.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 23, 2010 3:06 PM GMT
    Anto saidIt's not just keeping quiet about being gay. You are not suppose to engage in any same-sex sexual contact, admission to being gay, or be married or attempt to marry someone of the same-sex while serving, the policy applies 24/7
    Nicely put Anto. It goes so far beyond just not telling or not asking, it's a requirement that a certain group of people alter their lifestyle in order to serve. Singling out one group and then denying them the right to be who they are. Where in the US Constitution is that permitted? There are no requirements for any other single group to be able to serve. After reading the stories included in the federal judges opinion on DADT being unconstitutional, it angers me even more that politicians can outright LIE to the public about how this regulation is enforced.

    As for the pic: I've seen it before and it brings home the point. They're all brave soldiers, regardless of any factors.

    As for Lady Gaga: I agree that she did little to advance the thinking of those in society who just don't get it. If anything, I feel she did more damage based on her reputation. She will only appeal to the younger crowd that probably already sides with doing away with DADT. Having the President or some other high influential member of society become an advocate for the repeal would serve the community in a much better way, I think.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 23, 2010 3:19 PM GMT
    Noek_Sivad said
    You hit the nail on the head. to a point some people get it but for the most part IMHO this is what its about, especially seeing two people i know personally outed and then forced out the military based solely on their sexuality. Repealing DADT wont change how bigots think and react to gay people, but it sure as hell will make it a little easier to serve and would've made my 6 years a whole lot better when I was in.


    Mine too
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 23, 2010 3:25 PM GMT
    Soundwave said
    vetteset saidI have said this many times and I wondered if Congress has ever pondered the question: Since 1775, how many gay men and women have laid down their lives defending the United States of America, when the United States of America will not pick up a pen to defend them?

    A national shame, and it tears at my heart.....Keithicon_cool.gif


    One of many.
    America should really focus on championing human rights within it's own borders before it carpet-bombs another country for being just as bigoted.


    AMEN to that, brother!!! There is SO much work to be done INSIDE the U.S., how can anyone justify our interference in other countries???

    Viva La Isolationism!!
  • commoncoll

    Posts: 1222

    Sep 23, 2010 3:31 PM GMT
    Lostboy saidIt shows that American is not as great as it thinks it is, and that too many of its inhabitants are neither free (gay soldiers) nor brave (politicians).

    This bill had other attachments too, like funding immigrants and producing a engine for a fighter plane-even the White House opposes that engine. That measure failed, and thus the entire bill failed. It most likely had nothing to do with gay soldiers. The American army officer school West Point had a valedictorian a couple of years ago write a paper about ending DADT. It won first place.

    DADT on its own will pass in the next year or so.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 23, 2010 4:41 PM GMT
    Wow dude, thats for really fuckin up my day. I have three family members and two friends who are over seas right now. one of which is gay. thanks for makin it all hit home when sights like this im tryin to keep far from mind.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 23, 2010 4:48 PM GMT
    I love this................... ( teared up )