From: Charles.R.Hohenstein.1@nd.edu (Charles R. Hohenstein)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.correct
Subject: Re: Clinton's Cabinet (humorous suggestions)
Date: 15 Sep 92 02:20:48 GMT
Followup-To: alt.politics.correct
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of Notre Dame

In article <1992Sep14.002706.19048@news.acns.nwu.edu>,
dmeier@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (Douglas Meier) wrote:
> 
> In article <1992Sep9.225427.3320@galileo.physics.arizona.edu> krueger@galileo.physics.arizona.edu (Ted Krueger) writes:
> >
> >
> >A final analogy:  A gay man in the military, showering with dozens of 
> >other men is the same as a heterosexual man showering with dozens of 
> >women.  Would the women be in favor of the heterosexual man showering 
> >with them?
> 
> This analogy is not complete.  A gay man showering with dozens of straight men
> does not have his sexual interest reciprocated, whereas a straight man
> showering with several straight women may possibly show a reciprocation in
> sexual feelings between the man and the women.  Some of the women may not mind
> being looked at.  I think all straight men would be uncomfortable if they were
> being eyed down by other men.  Perhaps I'm wrong here.
> 
> I knew guys in high school who would not shower in gym because they were afraid
> a gay might be in the class.  A number of those went into the military.  If
> they thought any one of the people in their unit was gay.....
> Armageddon, baby.  Those guys would have killed or at least maimed anyone who
> was the least bit suspicious.  They fear what is unknown.

Then how excellent that we have the opportunity to identify and weed out of
the military persons who lack basic discipline, and who despise the
diversity and freedom of the nation they are defending. Incidentally, it is
also possible that gay soldiers might teach their bigoted straight
counterparts a lesson. I think they could take care of themselves.
> 
> In the above scenario it is relatively easy to point out a man in a shower
> full of women.  Not so with a gay in a shower full of straights.  This makes
> the threat of my paranoid classmates bludgeoning someone who they believe is
> gay even more likely if they know that gays are allowed in the military.  At
> the current time under current policy, rednecks like my classmates don't feel 
> the need to be belligerent because they have peace of mind knowing that they
> don't need to worry about it.  

That could change. Maybe our military could learn from "fags" like Julius
Caesar and Alexander the Great.
> 
> I think the policy is remaining the way it is because someone high up in the
> military probably thinks like my high school acquaintances.  Should it be
> changed?  Hard for me to say.  Sounds like an attitude change that needs to be
> made nationally at the grade school level before we thrust it on those that
> are lagging behind.

No way. Among private citizens, a certain amount of prejudice must perhaps
be tolerated, but it is absurd to expect gay taxpayers to accept blatant
discrimination by the very government which is supposed to secure the
rights of citizens, pending some eventual change of attitude. The military
should lead here, not follow.
>   
> >Ted
> 
> -- 
> Douglas C. Meier		|  Remember to vote this election year,       
>  				|  you probably won't get another one. 
> I don't claim them, they don't	|  
> claim me.......			|  dmeier@casbah.acns.nwu.edu
Newsgroups: alt.politics.correct