This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Live
PTR
10.2.7
PTR
10.2.6
Beta
No More "Don't Ask Don't Tell"
Post Reply
Return to board index
Post by
109094
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Heckler
I spent 6 years in the military and I was "forced" into a completely open, multi-person shower with other males exactly once, and that was in boot camp (where I didn't even learn half the names, much less sexual orientation). At all other times, it was possible to either go into the multi-person shower alone (timing), or to use a single-person shower (available at
every
command I was at except boot camp). I believe this is the standard, the vast majority of the time, in normal circumstances, you will have the opportunity to shower privately.
I can see a couple situations where this would be impossible, logistically. In these cases, "get over it" applies. For the same reason that if you don't like the sometimes horrible food, or you don't like sleeping in a 6x3x3 box, or you don't like staying up for 36 hours straight, or you don't like getting shot at, or you don't like being away from your family for months at a time, you should get over it. Privacy is important, but so are comfort, hunger, sleep, security, and family. The military is routinely asked to forego these luxuries, and so I'll stand by the fact that if you're in the (rare) situation where a multi-person shower is the only option -- suck it up.
There are rules against unwanted sexual advance or conduct, and these rules would apply if a homosexual person were acting inappropriately. So, when I say "get over it," I'm not saying you should toss away all expectation of privacy. I'm saying that the military already goes farther than you'd probably expect to provide privacy, and in the rare situation where that's not possible, you have no business to complain -- just shower off and get your game face on.
Post by
gamerunknown
I can see why certain people wouldn't be comfortable showering in front of members of either sex, of either sexual orientation. Hell, if secondary school changing rooms are any indication, the most flamboyantly
heterosexual
guys are the ones paying the most attention to genitalia, the most likely to get jocular, most likely to describe each other's genitalia in lurid detail and the most likely to accuse everyone else of being gay. Another solution not brought up so far is the Starship Troopers one: women and men of either sexuality showering and fighting together without explicitly sexual overtones. Though perhaps that level of maturity is a bit far-fetched.
Oh and the military is ahead of the rest of the USA. A majority (though a small majority IIRC) of states are permitted to discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation, which is outlawed in the UK. It'd be cool if it could be passed into federal legislation that employers can't discriminate on that basis.
Post by
ElhonnaDS
@ Heckler- having had no personal experience with the military, I was taking it at face value that all of the military people complaining about the hours and hours of group showering they were doing were being fairly accurate in how prevalent it was. If you're correct, and single-person showers are almost always available for people who are worried about it, then I agree- people need to get over it.
@ Everyone else who was complaining about the shower thing...why are you taking so many unnecessary group showers? I think you might need therapy after all...
Post by
MyTie
@ Heckler- having had no personal experience with the military, I was taking it at face value that all of the military people complaining about the hours and hours of group showering they were doing were being fairly accurate in how prevalent it was. If you're correct, and single-person showers are almost always available for people who are worried about it, then I agree- people need to get over it.
@ Everyone else who was complaining about the shower thing...why are you taking so many unnecessary group showers? I think you might need therapy after all...
The showering is simply one example. I took a handful of group showers in boot camp, but had a private shower under all other circumstances. There have been other situations where the gay/straight thing comes into consideration. The other one that comes to mind is the physical fitness examination that comes once a year.
I believe that just because the occasions are few, doesn't mean people should 'get over it'. If I were to be required, in the military, to take a shower with another woman besides my wife, even once, I wouldn't join the military. The question of the appropriateness of that situation and the value of my marriage come to mind as reasons. If I were already in the military, and it required me to put myself into a nude, possibly sexual, situation, I would leave the military, dishonorably if necessary. I wouldn't, and shouldn't have to "get over it".
And, how did you go from this:That being said, I think it's ridiculous to say that someone who wouldn't be comfortable showering with a member of the opposite sex or someone who was gay, for the same exact reasons, "needs therapy" or needs to "get over it". Privacy is an important issue. to this@ Everyone else who was complaining about the shower thing...why are you taking so many unnecessary group showers? I think you might need therapy after all...in less than a page?
Post by
91278
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
MyTie
And, how did you go from this ... to this... in less than a page?
It's pretty obvious how that happened if you bother to read the words on the screen.
Oh, THANKS! Now I see how it clearly happened:
ElhonnaDS: Try to be understanding to people.
Heckler: They don't know what they are talking about.
ElhonnaDS: Oh, then screw them.
I was operating from the understanding that it took more than a slight breeze to change an opinion on something. Now that I have read the words on the screen, I see that one can go from preaching tolerance to being intolerant in no time at all, and with little reason. I won't be questioning that again, now that you point out how obviously absurd it is for me to do so.
Seriously, I've worked very hard to be polite to people... but I've gotten quite enough of replies like this:read the words on the screenthat beg for nothing but a smack to the head with the sarcasm bat. Have I done something to you to warrant snide comments?
Post by
Heckler
The other one that comes to mind is the physical fitness examination that comes once a year.
Expand on this please, in detail. My annual fitness testing didn't involve anything where homosexuality would have mattered at all.
Post by
MyTie
The other one that comes to mind is the physical fitness examination that comes once a year.
Expand on this please, in detail. My annual fitness testing didn't involve anything where homosexuality would have mattered at all.
There was a lesbian woman who was in the military unit I was in. She and I were friends. She and I are still Facebook friends, but not really too close. We were the two squadron physical training monitors, which means we administered the fitness examinations, which involved measuring people's waist lines without their shirts on. She did the girls, I did the boys. As the ranking training leader, I received a number of complaints from women who did not want to be in the same room with her without their shirts. I simply outsourced all the females testing to another squadron's female training leader. No one asked why, and so the problem was solved. However, this illustrates how problems can arise and people can be made uncomfortable with having gay people put their hands on their naked bodies.
Post by
ElhonnaDS
I feel like it's explained the first paragraph you linked. I was under the assumption, when I made the statement, that group showering was the military norm, based on the comments people had been making. People were defending barring a whole group of people from the military, or making them lie and cover up their lives, and their biggest argument was the shower thing. It gave the impression that this was a constant occurence in military life, and that the presence of gays in the military would make this daily occurence uncomfortable.
Then, Heckler (and later you) said that it's really a rare occurence, a couple of times over several years of service, that the group shower thing has to happen. To me this means:
A) That since the majority of facilities DON'T rely only on group showers, it's going to be nowhere near as expensive to fix the problem by installing dividers for people.
B) The people who are so focused on the shower issue, as though it was an intrinsic part of military life that they'd constantly have to deal with, were being dramatic. Privacy is a concern, and I think that they should fix the showering situation. But to say that you're justified in keeping DADT around, regardless of the fact that it's discriminatory and had the potential to ruin careers and lives, because if someone is gay, there is a chance that on .01% of the total days someone was in the military, they might be in an uncomfortable situation is ridiculous. The easier fix is to convert the showers in basic training facilities to the same ones that the rest of the military is apparently using.
So, yes, in light of new information, my opinion has changed somewhat. It's like if I read a forum about how you were upset about being harassed daily by all of the people of a certain nationality in your building, and as a result you wanted them to ban all people of this nationality so that you don't have to risk it. I would say to that, the same way I adressed this issue initially, that while I don't agree with a ban or any kind of discriminatory action, people should be sympathetic to the fact that you didn't want to be harassed. If I then found out that in actuality, that in the 6 years you lived there you had been bothered twice, by some guys who may or may not have been that nationality, then your defense of the ban you're asking for becomes hollow and petty, and you look like you're grasping at straws.
Yes, you shouldn't be harassed in the above scenario. And yes, they should put up dividers in boot camp now so everyone is comfortable. But when your argument is that they should discriminate against an entire group of people because once in a great while, in a pretty uncommon situation, you might be made uncomfortable by one, that's absurd.
EDIT: I have a better example. Lets say, in my OB/GYN example, someone was complaining that on a day in and day out basis, a hospital was sysyematically embarassing women by forcing them to see an OB/GYN who was a man, if they wanted to be treated, regardless of their wishes. That sounds like a pretty messed up system. If, however, the situations is that one time, because their female OB/GYN was busy or out sick or something, and it was an emergency, they sent her a male doctor, that's different. It's not a daily, systematic uncomfortable and unfair situation. It's a rare situation, that doesn't happen too often (because in the few group showere you were in, how many times was someone in there gay, do you think?), and doesn't affect the majority of the patient's time spent in treatment with the hospital. Now lets say that, rather than say set up policies to have a female on call to prevent this from happening again, the patient demands that all male doctors in the hospital be fired, so that there is no chance of this ever happening. Then, the patient looks like she's being dramatic, and you get the feeling it's more abotu her disliking men than about that particular incident.
Post by
Heckler
There was a lesbian woman who was in the military unit I was in. She and I were friends. She and I are still Facebook friends, but not really too close. We were the two squadron physical training monitors, which means we administered the fitness examinations, which involved measuring people's waist lines without their shirts on. She did the girls, I did the boys. As the ranking training leader, I received a number of complaints from women who did not want to be in the same room with her without their shirts. I simply outsourced all the females testing to another squadron's female training leader. No one asked why, and so the problem was solved. However, this illustrates how problems can arise and people can be made uncomfortable with having gay people put their hands on their naked bodies.
Our waist measurements were done over the shirt, or at worst, raising the shirt slightly. I don't understand why this requires disrobing completely. Sounds a bit fishy, or at the very least, fixable by something other than a discriminatory policy. Like the shower thing, this feels so minor as to be ridiculous (as in, worthy of ridicule) in a military environment.
Post by
MyTie
But to say that you're justified in keeping DADT around, regardless of the fact that it's discriminatory and had the potential to ruin careers and lives, because if someone is gay, there is a chance that on .01% of the total days someone was in the military, they might be in an uncomfortable situation is ridiculous.
I never ever advocated this. I never opposed DADT, either. Personally I don't really care. I've tried not to take sides in that argument. My only points have been the logistical problems that are created with the removal of DADT.
Even though an individual will only shower with other people a few times, it is a daily occurrence in the military. Every day, people are showering together in the number of "basic training" facilities. In order to address this, the military would have to set up some special facilities, and request everyone's sexual orientation in order to provide proper facility. Further, can gays shower with gays? I mean, technically that could make gays uncomfortable. They can't shower with other women, and we are already talking about the problems it provides for straight on gay men. So, do they get their own private bathing facilities? Since boot camp is all about "you are not special" then would everyone get their own private bathing facilities? Where does this logical train end? In the end, you will not please everyone. Should that be attempted? I don't know, but the question is there.
Post by
MyTie
Our waist measurements were done over the shirt, or at worst, raising the shirt slightly. I don't understand why this requires disrobing completely. Sounds a bit fishy, or at the very least, fixable by something other than a discriminatory policy. Like the shower thing, this feels so minor as to be ridiculous (as in, worthy of ridicule) in a military environment.Maybe it is minor, I don't know. Regardless of how you and I feel about it, it made other people uncomfortable, so the issue exists.worthy of ridiculeI challenge you to try thinking of everything other people say as valid, even when it isn't. Try that out for a while and see if it changes how people talk to you.
Post by
Heckler
My point isn't that it
shouldn't
make people feel uncomfortable, my point is the
expectation
of perfect comfort in that environment is severely misplaced. That
expectation
is what's ridiculous, whether it's in that we didn't get satin sheets or we had to show our belly buttons to the gay guy.
Post by
ElhonnaDS
But to say that you're justified in keeping DADT around, regardless of the fact that it's discriminatory and had the potential to ruin careers and lives, because if someone is gay, there is a chance that on .01% of the total days someone was in the military, they might be in an uncomfortable situation is ridiculous.
I never ever advocated this. I never opposed DADT, either. Personally I don't really care. I've tried not to take sides in that argument. My only points have been the logistical problems that are created with the removal of DADT.
Even though an individual will only shower with other people a few times, it is a daily occurrence in the military. Every day, people are showering together in the number of "basic training" facilities. In order to address this, the military would have to set up some special facilities, and request everyone's sexual orientation in order to provide proper facility. Further, can gays shower with gays? I mean, technically that could make gays uncomfortable. They can't shower with other women, and we are already talking about the problems it provides for straight on gay men. So, do they get their own private bathing facilities? Since boot camp is all about "you are not special" then would everyone get their own private bathing facilities? Where does this logical train end? In the end, you will not please everyone. Should that be attempted? I don't know, but the question is there.
No...they would have to set up stalls between the shower heads in existing facilities. You don't have to put people in quarantine for being Gay. They're perfectly able to not look over a partition if they're normal human beings. If they do take to looking over, then that's a harassment issue. But they don't have to have separate buildings to give some measure of privacy.
Post by
MyTie
My point isn't that it
shouldn't
make people feel uncomfortable, my point is the
expectation
of perfect comfort in that environment is severely misplaced. That
expectation
is what's ridiculous, whether it's in that we didn't get satin sheets or we had to show our belly buttons to the gay guy.
Because people in the military are made uncomfortable by something, it shouldn't be dismissed because "that's life in the military".
You have stepped over into ridiculing, now. No one is asking for "perfect comfort" or "satin sheets". No one is so modest that they want to cover their "belly buttons".
So, what you present in your post is more "suck it up" mentality, slathered in not a little sarcastic spite.
Post by
gamerunknown
Seriously, I've worked very hard to be polite to people
Honestly, it's appreciated. We differ on the issue (I wouldn't distinguish between showering with naked* gay guys and naked straight guys), but you've been arguing cogently and politely throughout the thread and don't give the impression of any ulterior motive. I'd love to be able to be as civil and convincing when I argued against a large group of something.
* Say, now there's an idea. Would the commanding officer understand if one wanted to wear bathing suits because one felt uncomfortable in such a scenario?
Oh and in terms of the other issue of bunking with someone with a different sexuality, I went camping with an insomniac that would, when bored at 3am, regale us with the varieties of... err... titillation he enjoyed. All heterosexual, but ranging from older women to incestuous pairings
Post by
MyTie
No...they would have to set up stalls between the shower heads in existing facilities.That may workYou don't have to put people in quarantine for being Gay.See, this is what I'm talking about. Portraying me as an intolerant fear mongering jerk for pointing out a simple bathing issue is beneath us.
Post by
ElhonnaDS
To be fair, though, the solutions you have suggested seem to be kind of out of proportion to the problem at hand. If the problem is that you're shy about showering with someone else, put up a partition. This scenario you outlined about maybe having to create separate showering facilities for each sexuality and then hand out a survey to see where someone belongs seems...outlandish. And unnecessary. And so my reaction to someone who seems to want to go overboard with the separation of a group of people, above and beyond what is necessary to address the actual issue, is that there is an underlying either dislike, or sense that they are inferior in some way, that causes the immediate reaction to be "Keep them out of the whole army entirely" or "We'll have to build whole new buildings for them to shower in" rather than- "hmm- a cheap metal partition will fix that". It's hard to see the other side as being well-meaning and just wanting to tackle the problem at hand when the solutions they suggest seem to be overkill.
Post by
MyTie
It's hard to see the other side as being well-meaning and just wanting to tackle the problem at hand when the solutions they suggest seem to be overkill.
There are a range of solutions between "nothing" and "separate military" or even "no gays". I personally, am not advocating different showering facilities. I think that is a possible solution, and presented it as one, but I don't really know what should be done. I haven't settled on what I think should be done. I do like your idea of stalls. That seems like it would work, like it does at the beach showering facilities.
You'll find I am very open to suggestions for solutions. If you don't like the idea I suggest, then make your own. I will listen.
Post Reply
You are not logged in. Please
log in
to post a reply or
register
if you don't already have an account.