U.S. military ban on gays ends

Why did it take so long to end this discrimination? Then again, this is a country that had segregation about 50 years ago.

So the next step now should be to shift to uni-sex bathrooms, showers, barracks, etc.?

Uni-sex bathrooms? Are we talking hermaphrodites here?

Not sure what relevance that is to the military repealing DADT and such. In the civilian life I don't think that there are "uni-sex bathrooms" and showers in public facilities, but I haven't been to the States for a while. Maybe it's like that everywhere now and it was just places like Elmendorf (sp?) that had a men's bathroom any more.

According to the map here, only 25 countries allow gays to serve in the military, and they don't include China, India or Russia.

"14,000 servicemembers have been kicked out of the military under the rule"

What a waste of time and money. I always thought the ban was foolish.

Homosexuality shouldn't be a problem if it's out in the open. If you're not gay then what have you got to worry about? I can hardly see the campy types signing up for the military anyway, most I imagine will keep that side of themselves to themselves whilst serving....

I wonder how this will affect the military priests. Never understood how a priest in the military could 'give encouraging words of the bible, koran, etc' to the fighting men and woment that kill. Thall shall not kill?

And now they have to deal with homosexuals too? Interesting to hear about thier side ofthe story.

There was never a ban on gays, just on gayness.

zichi

pitiful comment from someone I assume is a member of the U.S. military.

Why is my comment pitiful? I have no issues with gays, lesbians, bisexuals, whoever, serving with me in the millitary and personally feel that repealing DADT was/is the right thing to do. BUT, this now opens up some related issues. Until now, living spaces were segregated by sex; we have male and female barracks rooms, male and female bathrooms, male and female showers, etc. and we were not able to access facilities of the opposite sex. But how do you define the opposite sex for someone who is gay, lesbian, or bi?

continued: In which berthing on a ship does an openly gay Sailor belong? In male berthing or female berthing? If the answer is that he is permitted to live in the male berthing with members of the sex to whom he can potentially be sexually attracted, then it calls into question why any space needs to be segregated at all. Living spaces have been segregated male-female because until now those were the only two recognized groups of sexual attraction and we had to keep them separated right? Now that we have more categories and VERY limited space on a ship for instance, the logical move would be to desegregate entirely. If a gay Sailor can see a male heterosexual Sailor naked in the shower, why can't a heterosexual female do the same? What's the difference other than X and Y chromosomes because the potential for attraction, sexual or otherwise, is the same for both cases and that's the reason for segregating the sexes in the first place, correct? Again, I'm glad that DADT is history and I realize that I'm sort of playing the devil's advocate here but now that gay-straight segregation is over, by the same standards/logic I don't see why male-female segregation for us in the military should remain. Desegrating the sexes in military berthings, bathrooms, showers, etc. would resuld in a considerable savings in cost and space for the services.

zichi

GAYS have been fighting wars and doing their part, for decades and decades. You will need to change.

Um, okay, change to what? We straights in the military have been fighting wars, doing our part, and showering with our gay comrades (yes it wasn't a much of a secret most of the time) for decades and decades. What exactly is going to change with this? Not much IMO.

@USNinJapan2, Very good post. I also want to bring up this point. If I as a married man can get charged in the UCMJ with adultery with another woman, then would a bisexual be exempt? Since DADT ended, the military still doesn't recognize gay marriage. So, as in the case of the LT who was all over the Navy Times web site that got married in VT at the stroke of midnight, he could still be in a realtionship with a woman (if he choses) and not get charged with adultery. Yet, me as a heterosexual will face a charge.

I wonder how this will affect the military priests.

Consider this, if they tell us now in the military that we can't go to "prostitutes" since it is morally wrong, then why can they turn around and say that a homosexual is morally right if they stay in a committed relationship?

I just think that they made too much of an issue with the repeal of DADT, and didn't really think about what will actually happen.

On a side not, for all of you who are celebrating because you think this law repealing DADT is the magic bullet that solves all problems for gays, lesbians, and bisexuals who wish to serve in the military, think again. Because the Defense of Marriage Act, which is a federal law defining marriage as a union between one man and one woman, exists, the Department of Defense (DOD) still does not and cannot recognize any same-sex marriages/unions entered by any of its uniformed members. So a gay Soldier who legally (by state law) marries his gay significant other in say Vermont while on leave will not be recognized as married by the Army and his significant other will not be recognized as his spouse and hence the Soldier will remain in a single status for pay, housing, health care, etc. Repealing DADT is definitely a historic and crucial step for them to serve openly in uniform but repealing the DofM Act is a much tougher nut to crack and the real and bigger battle for the same rights and entitlements as heterosexual service memebers is still ahead.

Uni-sex bathrooms?

Everyone knows it is hard for us to stand and pee.

Maybe all the urinals should be changed to potties and everyone forced to sit down.

This just reflects the change of the times in US society. For the first time ever, a majority of the US population supports the repeal of the DADT policy. So the US military is just representing its people.

Besides, the US military is a professional military. They're professionals - they'll do their jobs and cope. Heck, even Israel is OK with gays in its military - and it's a more conservative society than the US, and its military is in constant battles with militants on all sides; yet it's not a problem for their them.

Serrano: "According to the map here, only 25 countries allow gays to serve in the military, and they don't include China, India or Russia."

I'm sure they allow gays in the military (if it's discovered they are so), at least in some cases. They just don't recruit OPENLY gay people to serve. In other words, I'm sure things like DADT are alive and well in the nations that don't allow gays to serve openly.

Anyway, good on the US for taking a step forward, although I do fear that if a Republican takes office they'll want to make the step back and reimpose the ban.

Okay, I really don't know why anyone would find reason to give my last post of Sep. 21, 2011 - 04:24PM JST a thumbs down.

Make that two. Can either person who gave it the thumbs down bother to explain why? Did you give it a thumbs down because you don't want gays, lesbians, and bisexuals in the military to have the same benefits and entitlements as heterosexual service members? Or is it because you empathize with them and the fact that they have an uhill battle ahead of them before they are on equal footing with their straight comrades? Hope it's the latter...

So the next step now should be to shift to uni-sex bathrooms, showers, barracks, etc.?

Yep, and allowing women to vote and allowing colored people to share the same facilities as whites....

"Okay, I really don't know why anyone would find reason to give my last post of Sep. 21, 2011 - 04:24PM JST a thumbs down."

I'm with you USN, but I'm going to boycott the thumbs up/down thing. It's basically nothing more than a tool for those that disagree with your opinion but can't muster a retort as to why. An easy out.

I'm with you as well, USNIJ2. I cannot see anything negative in what you wrote at all. Maybe the first language of the people giving you the thumbs down is not English. Pay them no mind.

I really don't understand what the big deal is with guys in the military. I mean, guys have been in the military for most of history - except for that Joan of Arc non-guy, it's pretty much been guys galore. Heck, even Washington was a guy! It's about time that we - wait, what? Gays, you say?

Ah. Never mind. Same sentiment, though.

USNinJapan2, there have been homosexuals in the toilets before, this just lets them be open. Sexual harassment is sexual harassment, different sex or same sex it is the same. So the guy in the shower with you is interested in the same sex, they have been there all along. So chill out

USN I agree with you on both of your arguements. It's going to take a very long time to get gays their equally deserved benefits. They deserve them, but they won't get them simply for that DoM Act. I wish them the best of luck; I have a feeling they will need it.

soldave - there are and have been for some time now, uni-sex bathrooms in come colleges. Just an FYI, so the statement was legit.

in some* colleges, my apologies

YuriOtani

No need for me to chill out because I'm not upset by this story. I'm just stating the obvious: if the male-female segregation of living spaces, bathrooms, showers, etc. that we have come to think of as normal is based on separating the opposite sexes defined by sexual attraction (or the potential for), then you can't rationally defend continuing to segregate these facilities by male and female now that parties that have the potential for attraction (sexual or otherwise) are supposed to share these facilities where we have little to no privacy. Again, I'm not anti-gay in any way. All I am pointing out is that there really is no rational justification any more for segregating bathrooms, showers, etc. by male or female any more. Do you disagree?

As long as they don't go to Wikileaks gays in the army etc...ok IMHO