Lez Girls iPod

Music Playlist at MixPod.com
Lez Girls are saying
Powered by ShoutJax

My first Musing.....

Go down



My first Musing.....

This my inaugural Rant…um….I mean Musing. On a Soapbox It’s about something a little political I guess…but I really think it crosses all kinds of lines…and should be of interest to all.

These past weeks, when my attention wasn’t riveted to the television watching those Chilean Miners being rescued, I have been reading Cup o Coffee about the US Military’s policy called “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” (DADT) For those of you that either do not live in the US or just aren’t aware…here is a pretty good explanation you can read or skim. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don%27t_ask,_don%27t_tell

Basically it is a policy that does not allow openly gay men and women to serve in the military…of course if you want to hide it deep in your “Foot Locker”…it is fine…The military won’t “ask” (Try to discover or reveal) Well, like Tasha on the L-Word…how does one keep that a secret?

It has been in the news because, just recently, a Federal Judge (yes…from California) issued an injunction (basically halting it’s enforcement…for now) .on the grounds that the policy is unconstitutional and, believe it or not, nearly 70% of Americans agree with this finding. However, what the average citizen thinks has never mattered much to the military….or the Government.

What has always confused me from the inception of this policy, in the late 90’s, was how is would be enforced? Are all military personnel followed off duty and their social lives scrutinized or just the ones “suspected to be gay“? Who sets these standards? Is is based solely on suspicion...accusations? I mean, do they look for stereotypical signs like if a solder sings Broadway Show tunes and maybe worries about his manicure when taking target practice….I mean what or who starts the investigation? Why the hell was it needed.

In the military, though I have never served but my younger sister was in the army for three years, I have always been told they are taught discipline, honor and respect for the uniform. Were does sex come in? Every service member has strict codes of conduct decorum and dress when they are on duty…why would the off duty sex lives be of more interest than their on duty performance? Why is the private behavior of Gay and Lesbians be of more interest than that of Heterosexuals? I mean…behavior unbecoming the standards that they are trained to uphold is the same no matter what your sexual orientation is…right?

Up until the first Gulf War, I believe, there was another antiquated misconception. It was thought, that women had no place in the combat zone. It was judged that woman would cause distractions and discipline problems. In other words, the Pentagon thought that solders would be in fox holes stooping instead of fighting the enemy…What? Are they not taught DISCIPLINE? Of course the military is finding this not to be at all the problem as they thought. Women are capable and valuable members of our armed forces…even though not quite on the front lines…yet. Now the discrimination is solely with the Gay and Lesbian solders, sailors, etc. Since this policy of DADT was set in place 14,000 American armed forces members have been forced out of the military because they somehow let it be common knowledge that they were Gay. Not because they committed acts on other solders or violated any military code of conduct other than being Gay. Valuable service members, interpreters, technicians, and just people willing to serve their country let go. Why?

Are we to really believe that the majority of young men and women serving in the military will be worried when they are engaging the enemy that the person fighting beside them is checking out their ass and not doing the task at hand? That somehow there will be so much sex going on in the far off camps where these young people who have taken an oath to protect our county that the enemy will sneak up and capture every last one of them? I mean what?

This DADT policy is such blatant discrimination the likes of which have not been seen since World War II. After that “War to End All Wars” in 1948, then President Harry Truman, signed an executive order FINALLY integrating the military. This came about partly because of the fact that one of the most decorated units of WWII consisted of Japanese Americans fighting together because they were not allowed to fight with the White solders…all the while at home their families were held in camps away from the general population merely because of their heritage. Against all odds and preconceptions, these men defended the principles and the ideals of the US better than anyone. You'd think we learned our lesson...

This injunction against DADT can be only temporary…it is actually up to congress to permanently end the policy…or the supreme court to uphold the injunction….so no “coming out” parties just yet…we have to wait and see…..

Our President said ( and Tweeted) this the other day:

"Anybody who wants to serve in our armed forces and make sacrifices on our behalf should be able to. DADT will end & it will end on my watch"

I am going to hold him to this…

Thanks for listening and I promise…all my “Musings” will not be on such serious or political subjects…it raises my blood pressure too much. I can’t, however promise they won’t be this long….hey…I’m Irish…full of the Blarney!!!


“Every day is a new beginning. Treat it that way. Stay away from what might have been, and look at what can be”...Marsha Petrie Sue
Mother Ocean
Mother Ocean

Posts : 307
Join date : 2010-09-27
Location : So CaL


Back to top Go down

Share this post on: diggdeliciousredditstumbleuponslashdotyahoogooglelive

My first Musing..... :: Comments


Post on Fri Oct 15, 2010 12:12 pm  yellowsmileyfaces

Ok, so I am going to respond to yours with a thought that went through my head when i was reading your muse. Now I am not saying that I agree or disagree with the DADT policy, I am just wondering if this is a reason. When children are first shown a sex ed video, they seperate them. Why? Is it because they think they will jump on each other and start acting out what they have just seen? No its because their little minds, will be distracted by having the opposite sex in there with them. The school board has decided that it is important for them to learn and they need to take out as many distractions as they can. I can't help but wonder if this is how are military is. Maybe they did not assume that a women would jump on a man if she were sent out to war. Maybe they assumed it would distract the men from doing their job. I mean come on, doesn't that have a little bit of truth in it. A man sees boobs and he gets this silly little grin on his face and then you see the lights go off.
With gays and lesbians, I think that only now the world is getting ready to handle this. Before it would totally distract the men and women that were already supposed to be doing a job. Now, I believe people are accepting this more. The belief that if they are gay, they will try to turn me gay is fading and people are realizing we are all after the same thing....love. So good for Obama for now realizing we are at the period he can say that, but honestly he did not do this. We as a nation have just grown over the last ten years or so and are making it easier for him to say it without getting thrown out of office.

Back to top Go down

Mother Ocean

Post on Fri Oct 15, 2010 1:48 pm  Mother Ocean

Actually, President Obama promised this in his campaign...and his inauguration speech. He has already brought up the matter and was waiting for congress to act....who should be the proper body to ban this policy...not the courts. However, congress, as usual, did not want to take up this sensitive issue in an election year...might make them look like they have balls or something....and the opposition party...well let's not get into their motivations....most of their opinions represent the very vocal minority in this country who believe that any support of "Gay Rights" is a endorsement of homosexuality. That minority is the base of their support.

As President, he is no longer allowed (by another act of congress) to use the same stroke of the pen as President Truman. He can only bring up the issue... have people testify....which they have....military and other experts....in front of congressional committees so they will get off their asses and vote this out. Many in the upper brass of the military have agreed that this policy only hurts the strength of our military. It is said that there is the majority in congress to do this but now but, since the injunction, in order to do this...bring this back to congress, the administration has to fight this injunction...even though they AGREE with it!! So stupid. Such a waste of time. All because of unfounded fears...and the unwillingness for those in congress to risk their re election to do the right thing.

I understood your analogy with the sex education and school kids...however these are not children. Kids are not expected to be as disciplined and have rigid rules like those in the military....and their hormones are not expected to be in check. We are talking about highly trained and disciplined adults with the full knowledge of what the consequences of any unwanted advances or sexual activity while in uniform. Just enforce those codes of conduct and things will work as well as they can. Those codes also involve harassing or acting towards each other in a discriminatory way.

My sister is now a member of a religion that calls gays "an abomination" and does not really embrace my sexuality. However, she is the first to tell you from her experience in the Army, that harassment from "Heterosexual" males against the "dykier" women was horrendous...but allowed. The pressure to keep hidden what was so obvious for some of the women in her unit, created an atmosphere of distrust and stress. She is heterosexual and never had anyone force their sexuality on her by her "obviously gay" counterparts...her views were respected. However, she met her first husband in the army and her off base relationship with him before they were married, was never brought into question....but she did feel she was being watched when she went off duty with her best female friends.

My point is....at a time when we need to be protected....all of us....and as the President said....if someone is willing to sacrifice their lives for us to protect us...they deserve every respect we can give them....no question. It should be Don't ask cause we DON'T CARE.

Back to top Go down


Post on Fri Oct 15, 2010 3:12 pm  minnie

I can’t talk about things that I don’t know.
Of course, I read what happened and I can only give my opinion, even if I can’t have, of course, a complete picture of the situation.
I don’t think that things will change soon only because there is a judge's order that declared the military's "Don't ask, don't tell" policy unconstitutional.
By the way , I read that Obama had already tried to carry a law to repeal the "Do not Ask Do not Tell” policy but he did not get the sixty votes necessary as a super majority to avoid the obstruction of Republicans. Is that true?
If it is so , I think that, on the one hand , this order helps him but on the other hand it exposes him because he will have to decide very quickly whether or not to appeal the order and this can be a problem especially in this electoral phase.
Anyway.. I can relate what happens in my country.
We don’t have any written restriction for the gay soldiers. It is not written, but , according to what many of our gay soldiers relate, they are constantly victims of abuses, insults and discriminations.
I think that in any and hierarchical institution, above all when it is about a male institution, being gay will always be a problem because it is a matter of conflict.
The problem is not to repeal the DADT policy .. but .. and I mean IN EVERY COUNTRY … the only thing to do would be that there were explicit positions to eliminate permanently the pockets of homophobia .
I think that gay people are a “surplus value”, everywhere, whatever they do .

Back to top Go down


Post on Fri Oct 15, 2010 4:13 pm  yellowsmileyfaces

So you are taking everyone in our military is an upright, disciplined human being that only does what is right? If that were so, then wouldn't there not be a need for the military police or court at all. Yes maybe my analogy was children, but lets face it most people have not grown up that much.....especially when it comes to sex.
Like I said, I applaud Obama for trying to get rid of the DADT policy. I think he found the perfect time to bring it to America. However, I do wonder if he would have said this 10 years ago. Of course then, America was not ready for a black president either.

Back to top Go down

Mother Ocean

Post on Fri Oct 15, 2010 4:26 pm  Mother Ocean

No I am not trusting all to be upright...just that they should all be judged by the same rules....bad behavior is bad behavior. Sexual orientation in it's self is not "Bad Behavior". Kick anyone out...gay or straight.....if they cannot follow the rules. We are wasting too many valuable people merely because the armed services do not want to deal with basic problems or are interjecting their personal phobia into running the military.

I would imagine that Barrack Obama was opposed to DADT. So was President Clinton....but at the time it was the best he could do with a Republican Majority in congress.

According to the mood our country is in right now....many people are still not ready to come into the 21st century and judge each other by the strength of their character and not the color of their skin or sexual orientation....sad... Peace Love...

Back to top Go down


Post on Fri Oct 15, 2010 4:42 pm  yellowsmileyfaces

I think it just easier to say no to distractions than deal with all that could come. If America was ready for it, then there would be no gay bashing to begin with. To be honest, I think most men in society deal with the DADT every day. People live in the closet because they think they will be treated differently and sometimes, most times they are correct. So is our military wrong for actually labeling it, or is society wrong for pretending we are ok with something that we are obviously not? Our military is a representation of America. If America was ok with it then Gay marriage would be legal. Now like I said at the beginning I was not saying whether or not I agreed, just stating why I think they do it....

Back to top Go down

Mother Ocean

Post on Fri Oct 15, 2010 8:26 pm  Mother Ocean

You have a point...a small one....While a lot of the thinking of our society cannot help be taken into the military with the people who serve. It is not society and their beliefs that the military defends...because those beliefs are fleeting and ever changing. The military's sole function is to defend the Constitution of this country....not society. It is to defend the freedoms guaranteed under that document. There is no taking the easy road...they are stripped of political views by the very nature of the job they have taken upon themselves and taken an oath to do. There is no politics. Otherwise we would have our armed services rising up against the government for purely political purposes. You can not compare the armed services with general society....it is like apples and oranges....it can't be done. I tshould not be done. Gay bashers in society are not accepted if they move toward violence and discrimination..however people who do not see that being gay is acceptable have every right to think that ;under our Constitution. However, they do not have the right to discriminate under the same Constitution. The Military is there to defend the Constitution...that is why they are indoctrinated into the "Military" way of thinking. It is not based on social views...it is based on following orders, not just the ones they see as aligned with their political or religious beliefs. They are taught discipline under the most horrific situations. If the commanding officers say walk on water...they have to do their best every last on of them without question to do just that... or get out.

So, if what you are saying is correct. A gay man fighting along side of a straight man is a distraction....to much of a distraction that the military does not want to deal with it...and if it worries just one straight guy so much that he won't even try to Walk on Water because he is distracted....who should leave the military? The Gay man who is doing a damn good moon walk on that water....or the straight guy who is hip deep in the water and complaining about the FAG next to him\? If what you say is correct...and the military is just a reflection of the political and moral atmosphere of society at the moment.....then...they would be free to pick and choose what they fight for....and when....and for who.....like many third world country's army's do all the time....because thy are allowed to.

Just like the saying for World War II...."There are no Atheists in a Fox hole"..meaning when it all come down to it....under a common goal of self preservation and survival we all become believers of a higher power...... There are no Democrats or Republican in those fox holes either....There are no Straight or Gays when solders are storming toward an enemy set forth by our government....a power given to our government by the Constitution but there are parts of the Constitution that provide the checks and balances as to who can send us to war and for what reasons....the solders are not allowed to even have an opinion on who or what the enemy is.....it is not a Democracy...all have to be focused on one goal.....all are disciplined to do one thing....follow orders without question and defend the Constitution of the United States...not part...not some....All of it. No thinking about if you only want to defend the Jews or the Catholics....the Irish or the Italian American.....no questioning what is the popular belief at the time....the CONSTITUTION. We as private citizens have the freedom to chose who we associate with....who we like and don't like....right or wrong. We have the right to reveal what we want about ourselves....everything or nothing....We have the right to criticize the Government and be against a war....that is in the Constitution....Not in the Military....and policies like DADT being contrary to the Constitution....has no place in the Military nor was it ever needed.... PERIOD...Think about it......

Denying Gay marriage is unconstitutional....there is no definition in the Constitution saying what marriage is....it is the lack of enforcement from our government that does not allow gay marriage.....there is a difference. Until these laws forbidding Gay Marriage have all been challenged using the Constitution....or the Constitution is ammended....they must remain laws...flawed as they are....

Like I said before...Peace and Love.....

Back to top Go down

Mother Ocean

Post on Fri Oct 15, 2010 11:17 pm  Mother Ocean

I bet y'all can't wait until next week and my second edition of Mother's Musings.....LOL!!! I was thinking...evolution....or reproductive rights....or maybe why bagels and donuts have holes in the middle...hmmmmmm.....LOL!!!!

Back to top Go down


Post on Sat Oct 16, 2010 1:27 am  paperinik

OMG!!!! I'm worried you wrote a lot and I need two weeks to read all... Very Happy My opinion is only one. Freedom freedom freedom to be that we are. If a woman or man is good in her/his job, in family, in society, in the life, it's only really thing important not if she/he is gay, or straight. sunny

Back to top Go down

Mother Ocean

Post on Sat Oct 16, 2010 1:31 am  Mother Ocean

If you need a week to read it all.....take a week to read it all if you like! Here you are free to do what you like, MQ!! queen

Back to top Go down


Post on Sat Oct 16, 2010 12:32 pm  yellowsmileyfaces

LOL good battle mom! Can't wait for next week!

Back to top Go down

Post   Sponsored content

Back to top Go down

Back to top

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum