Married quarters for homosexuals?

[Joe Black]

Hi all,

Myself and my fiancee are currently both in the Air Force and both at different bases. I am currently in the SNCOs Mess and she is in other accommodation. Currently I am not in a position to buy until she gets her next posting - does anyone know if an excess married quarter would be available to us? If the answer to the question is no, can anyone tell me why homosexuals are given this right?
I know it's a very obscure post but I'm just looking to gain as much information as possible!

[fabs]

If there are an excess of quarters available at your unit they should. At my last unit I Lived in one on my own.

[Joe Black]

Thanks very much for the reply, will get onto DHE tomorrow!

[buoy15]

Probably the same reason hetrosexual male crew members have to share the same room on detachment
Basic rule! - sleep on your back with 1 foot on the floor :ouch:

[Muzza9999]

Joe,

Just to point out that to obtain a married quarter homosexual couples must have a civil partnership ceremony first. This is essentially a marriage ceremony that is the only option for same sex couples. It is viewed in the eyes of the military as the same as marriage as marriage as we know it is not an option for them. It is easy to be dismissive about this, but the civil ceremony is just as binding as a marriage one. This does nothing to dissuade the bigots ranting on about it, but the simple solution is to head for the chapel!

Regards and good luck

Muzza

[An Teallach]

Simple,

Get married or enter into a civil partnership = entitled to quarters.

Single or long-term relationship (incl. engagement) = apply for excess quarters if available.

Same rules for straight and gay people, what's the problem? :confused:

[Runaway Gun]

I too gained a Married Quarter before I was actually married. :eek:

It was in excess, so DHE were happy to take my rent.

Some idiot complained of course, and I was bollocked by my WGCDR Boss for flaunting the rules. "Get a life" was not uttered from under my breath at the time....

[Suckmabobby]

Joe,

Just to point out that to obtain a married quarter homosexual couples must have a civil partnership ceremony first. This is essentially a marriage ceremony that is the only option for same sex couples. It is viewed in the eyes of the military as the same as marriage as marriage as we know it is not an option for them. It is easy to be dismissive about this, but the civil ceremony is just as binding as a marriage one. This does nothing to dissuade the bigots ranting on about it, but the simple solution is to head for the chapel!

Regards and good luck

Muzza


So Muzza's a raving bender then?:D

[Runaway Gun]

JB, I have a theory.

If all else fails, tell the Powers that both you and your girlfriend are raving homos (or even Bi's), and they might let you stay.

[shawtarce]

Having met a number of "real" lesbians (friends of my wife), I would just like to ruin the image.
Unfortunately they are not all six foot slim georgous babes, who are just dying to have fun with their friend, while you watch, before inviting you to join them in the bed.......
I agree with An Teallach, if you want to be entitled to a quarter, get marrried. Church, civil service, registry office, drive by in a pink cadillac through the little white chapel in Vegas, whatever you fancy.
Straight, Bi or Homo, at the end of the day, marriage certificate = Quarter.

[16 blades]

A civil partnership is not a marriage.

16B

[D-IFF_ident]

Joe,

Speak to your padre and tell him about the hardship you are facing by not getting a quarter. I fought the system for 18 months, taking my claim as far as the Sec of State for Defence. Having got nowhere - even after having a child and jumping through all the hoops to get marital cat 2 - DHE wouldn't give me a house. A mate told the padre of my plight, padre demanded HTS get me a house, hey presto - 18 months from me for nothing, 18 hours from the padre and we moved-in the following weekend.

I tried not to get upset about the civil partners getting quarters, but I was very annoyed when a convicted fellon was allowed to stay with his girlfriend and subsequently murder her daughter.

Good luck.

[Joe Black]

D-Band,

Thanks for the reply, sorry to hear your troubles with it too! I'm going to speak to them and will keep the padre idea in mind. No doubt I will be forced into buying something even though I don't know if the missus will be joining me!
Cheers

[Tim McLelland]

So Muzza's a raving bender then?:D

Do people still use that kind of language? I thought it had died-out with Jim Davidson, mullets and platform heels. Bless!

I love that line from Joe about not having a problem with gays/lesbians. I know it was probably unintentional but the way he says it, he makes it sound like being gay is some sort of crime that he's expected to condone or overlook. I hope he also feels that straight people should "keep themselves to themselves" too?!

Sometimes I wonder if it really is 2006:)

[Bob Viking]

I'm engaged (for another 3 weeks!) and also tried to get a quarter, but to no avail (I bought a house in the end).
I know of a couple who did get a quarter early, but of course they are not allowed to co-habit until after the wedding!
That's right. The year is 2006. Sweet weeping Jesus.
BV:ugh:

[London Mil]

I'm engaged (for another 3 weeks!) and also tried to get a quarter, but to no avail (I bought a house in the end).
I know of a couple who did get a quarter early, but of course they are not allowed to co-habit until after the wedding!
That's right. The year is 2006. Sweet weeping Jesus.
BV:ugh:


Back in the last millenium, I was graced with a MQ five days before my wedding. I suppose the problem would be defining when someone would be entitled to a house. Take it to the extreme and DHE/DE(HS), or whatever they call themselves today, would have a queue of airmen hanging around outside every Friday morning, after declaring their undying love the night before round the back of the NAAFI bop. :oh:

Does seem a little strange though. How about we get rid of quarters and pay everyone (singlies included)enough money so they can decide where they want to live?

[sirsaltyhelmet]

Something on this subject here

http://www.e-goat.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=778 (http://www.e-goat.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=778)

[South Bound]

Never work - how many places have you worked that you would actually like to live? I can think of one and I can't afford to live there (not many can to be honest). Although this is the way we are going with the 'Superbases' as people will be in a location for a lot longer with far more opportunity for stability as a result. All fine if you want to live in Swampland, Lincolnshire, Rutland, Cartoontown, Wootten Bassett, Scotland, Scotland, or Scotland....

[500days2do]

Married Quarters...surely Service Families Accomodation is the correct term :ugh:

5d2d

[jindabyne]

Sometimes I wonder if it really is 2006

Sadly, it is.

[downsizer]

Just a quick point, if you do secure a surplus quarter, you will not be allowed to co-habit, this was made very clear to me when I bagged a surplus MQ. However what went on after the little hitler left, well who knows?

[stiknruda]

I'm engaged (for another 3 weeks!)

Does the Welsh one know that you intend to ditch her in three weeks? :{ :{

[Bob Viking]

Not yet. Keep it quiet if you could!
Only 3 more weeks of freedom. Thank god I have a holiday (sorry honeymoon!)to compensate!
BV:{

[MATZ]

You require Chapter 10 of JSP 464 (Tri-Service Accomodation Regulations).

Basically, if there is surplus SFA at your Unit, and the Military Commander supports your application, and IF DEHD say yes, you may reside, however, co-habitaion is not permitted, and you will have to sign an "no co-habitation" certificate during the move in process.

I have recently been through all these hoops to get my SFA 2 weeks earlier than my entitlement upon marriage - it took them 4 months to say yes, but then said I would still have to wait the 21 days they are contractually obliged to give MHS to bring the SFA up to standard - strangely, 21 days coincided with my entitlement date! Damn.

Best of luck though,

MATZ

[movadinkampa747]

Basically,


Good basically!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!:O

[fabs]

Quote:
Originally Posted by MATZ
Basically,

Good basically!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :O
Thank you :ok:

[Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaargh!]

marriage certificate = QuarterI thought it was the opposite, marriage certificate = No Quarter given (or expected)

[buoy15]

Southbound
Ah yes Scotland!
Presently enjoying 25degC with a 12kt cooling breeze from the NW which is ideal for sailing and the golf course - the caravan sites are jam packed, as are the endless miles of ****e free beaches, parks and tennis courts where the kids play paedophile-free, and you can get a very handsome haddock & chip supper for £3.50 and a pint of Bellhaven Best for £2.40
You can also taste the fresh air here, which, coupled with a few drams of Highland Park, ensures a good nights sleep
I do believe after the last announcement that ISK is now a superbase!
"Git yerself poosted ma loon, yer'll nae regrit it"
Regards from a very suntanned B15

[SpotterFC]

tablet,

leave the (potential) bigot alone.:= You share a common problem - he has no problem so long as "they keep themselves to themselves" and you don't have a problem if they don't get up your nose - same issue. And it's going to derail the thread...

Back to housing (the purpose of this thread).

I know advice to get wed is rarely the answer some people are looking for, especially if the time or finances are not right for the full bash - but go do the registry office thing then do the full white wedding church thing later and have a blessing. If you want the quarter because you are in a long-lasting meaningful relationship then get a piece of paper and faff about with the meringue dresses later. If you want it because you fancy getting out of the block because you work out that it's cheaper for the pair of you - get a private flat - the way quarter rents are going (POLICY!!) they'll be equivalent in a couple of years; cheating on the 'no-cohabitation clause' won't work because there will always be some interfering busybody on the patch who dobs you in.

[Maple 01]

Not this s*** again, some fancy girls, some fancy boys - get over it

Don't think of is as a problem, look on it as a opportunity

You pair up with your 'bezza', go through the processes and say hello to subsidised accommodation - I doubt if even the RAFP would check who's been sleeping where (oops, wrong thread) then, both 'come out', (er...if you see what I mean) and install chosen ladies under said DHE roof claiming them to be half sisters or some such, don't dissolve 'civil partnership' until one or other is posted*

Job's a good 'un:ok:

*Slight snagget, you must really trust your oppo

[Tim McLelland]

just out of interest, why did you refer to Joe Blacks fiance as his girfriend and your other half as your partner. Surely in this context he is your boyfriend?:uhoh:

It's a question of terminology. The word "girlfriend" suggests that she is just that, and not his wife/partner as yet (ie, she's his fiance) Conversely, a partner is precisely that, not a "boyfriend"...

And as Ayeright says, is there some implication that his relationship any less valid or important than the other fella's?

There are lots of minor comments floating about here which, on the face of it, could be regarded as throw-away lines, but it's this kind of attitude that reinforces homophobia and leads to heaven-know how many lives being screwed-up. To hear someone loftily saying that he has "no problem with homosexuals" providing that "they keep themselves to themselves" is just offensive. Gay people don't announce that they "have no problem with straight people as long as they keep themselves to themselves"...

What on earth is he implying? Does he think that gay people are giggling, girly sex maniacs waiting to molest every guy they can seduce? Maybe he's been watching too much Graham Norton? I don't want to sound like another whining, militant gay rights campaigner, but this kind of attitude is precisely the kind of thing that the RAF doesn't need to be getting from servicemen. The simple (and rather mundane) fact is that gay men are exactly the same as everyone else, except that they have a sexual preference for people of the same gender. So why do we have to persist with the schoolboy sniggering, nasty, condescending comments like those described, or anything else which, if applied to other groups, would be regarded as disgusting? Just a couple of weeks back, the Royal Navy sent a group of servicemen through London, in uniform, as part of the annual Gay Pride parade. Thankfully, the Navy has finally got over the infantile gay sniggers syndrome, so let's hope that the RAF follows?

As for the original point of this thread, you have to bear in mind that gay couple, straight couples, the MoD and everyone else, gets wrapped-up in such difficulties because of the muddled thinking of the government and the interference of the Church. The Partnership business only came-about because gay people wanted legal equality with straight couples. The Church insisted that the sanctity of marriage had to be protected (from us dirty, lowly homos) and so the government caved-in and accepted that there would be one rule for straight people and another for gay people. Hence the confusion, resentment and continual biccering. Gay couples can't get married because the govermnment won't let them... because of the poisonous influence of the church. Like so many things in life (not least the various military campaigns we're currently wrapped-up in) it's good ol' religion that is ultimately responsible.

[D-IFF_ident]

Try having a child with her.

Then you can have a quarter (as marital cat 2), but she can only stay 56 nights in any 12 month period.

You can have anyone else to stay; an au pair, cleaner, stripper, her sister perhaps, for the other 309 days, but she can only stay 56. Otherwise DHE can withdraw your entitlement.

Hence I couldn't get a quarter when marital cat 2, because DHE didn't trust the mother of my child wouldn't stay past her prescribed welcome.

Surely it's 1906?

[Talking Radalt]

My only advice on this is to get out of DHE accommodation whatever way you can.
Buy, rent, house-sit, anything to avoid the beaurocratic self-important semi-retired gits, their substandard crumbling sheds and the 1930s opinions of family life.
Only once you've moved out will it become clear what a real shambles DHE is.

[vecvechookattack]

D-IFF is right. A mate of mine is single but lives in a MQ....because he has a son who is at Boarding school and he collects the BSA...therefore he is entitled to a MQ...But the lad doesn't live with him...cos he's at boarding school...How daft is that?

[Rev I. Tin]

D-IFF is right. A mate of mine is single but lives in a MQ....because he has a son who is at Boarding school and he collects the BSA...therefore he is entitled to a MQ...But the lad doesn't live with him...cos he's at boarding school...How daft is that?

Maybe the poor lad doesn't want to live in his dad's cupboard in the mess, and would prefer to live in his own room when home on exeat, half term and summer hols?

[pr00ne]

Tim McLelland,

That was an excellently put post, well done!

pr00ne

[TheInquisitor]

WHOA! Half (more than, even) this thread just disappeared!

I guess the gay mafia is alive and well on PPRuNe, then.

Gays, take note. THIS kind of thing is what pisses decent straight (non-homophobic) folks off more than anything. I notice all the gay propaganda has been left untouched. What say you, PPRuNe?

[MR12]

[QUOTE=Tim McLelland]Do people still use that kind of language? I thought it had died-out with Jim Davidson, mullets and platform heels.
Yes, strange as it may seem, people do, and some of us have more of a problem with censorious, tut-tutting types than we do with any adult sexual orientation. The crowning beauty of the English language is its unequalled breadth, much of it inevitably derogatory, and the chief saving grace of its users is - or was before they let their dingleberry politicos stir up an inane grievance culture which disproportionately benefits bourgeois paternalists - an ability to take offence and reply with something equally amusing and inventive. Mature adults might not use such words in everyday discourse, but they always remember : 'If you can't take a joke...'
While wariness of or hatred for homosexuality might be silly and culturally insensitive (take note all : the PC no longer describe themselves thus) the only harm it'll do is if Bliar and his comrades put £1 of the defence budget in a big pink swear box every time some liney, Rock or fearless aviator uses a word they disapprove of, in which case we won't be able to invade the Isle of Dogs and the Typhoon fleet'll be on www.everettaero.com by Christmas. Personally I'd have thought that the last thing the RAF needs right now is another round of budget cuts, the Args invading the FIs or the EOC dicking around with a linguistic witch-hunt, but I stand to be corrected.
And to conclude the rant, in what way was the RN's presence at the Gay Pride event some kind of good ? The armed forces have no business being 'representative' of the UK population and no business 'reaching out' to or reassuring any self-defined segment of it. The armed forces exist to do the single most fundamental job of any arm of the state and the membership standard must be visibly and aggressively indivisible. No 'West Indian RAF Association', no 'Gay RN Association', no 'RIR Sash My Father Wore FTP Association', no 'White Middle Class And Vigorously Heterosexual Thank You Very Much Tornado Pilot's Association'; if you're good enough, you're in, you're ours and you're nothing else. Those who have a problem with being British members of the British armed forces can sod off to America and claim any identity they want.
I am not a number ! Oh no, hang on, I am. Sorry.

[Training Risky]

MR12:ok: :ok: :D :D

Well said fella!

We had a very interesting discussion at the Purple Learning Centre in Swindonshire the other day, in which the Zero Tolerance 'campaign' came up. The general consensus was that it is grossly biased against white straight men - hopefully we will get OUR questionaire to give OUR statistics on how many of us in the RAF have suffered sexual harassment.

90% of women?.....b0ll0(ks!

PS: If I so wished, could I wear my best blues at a White Power rally if gays can attend their personal pressure groups?

[Tim McLelland]

MR12, you've heroically missed the point, I fear.
I can quite understand that some people might well get sick and tired of political correctness - I do too, but this subject has lots to do with the RAF and MoD. You'll be only too aware of the acute problems that the MoD is having in terms of recruitment, and it makes perfect sense to "put one's house in order" to ensure that no member of the public feels excluded from the opportunity to join the armed forces. On a wider theme, just from a moral viewpoint it has to be a good thing too, doesn't it?
I think that from your persepctive, you're looking at this matter as if the MoD is making unfair efforts to cater for the interests of a minority group. Okay, if you look at it like that then it might seem annoying, but try looking at it from the perspecteive of a young gay man (or woman) who is just the same as any other lad, has a passion for aeroplanes or military subjects, wants to get through school and be a fast jet pilot or join the Army or whatever, and what does he think? He gets a mental image of sniggering comments, sideways looks, whispered rumours, or worse still, abuse, maybe even violence, all because he merely has a different sexual orientation which doesn't render him any less capable of doing his job, or living his life in just the same way as anyone else.
I quite agree that political correctness is a mixed blessing which often annoys rather than impresses, but we can't allow a modern society, and particularly our armed forces, to continue condoning the kind of attitudes that are better suited to early Carry-On films. Gay people (okay with some exceptions) are not limp-wristed, pink-wearing, girly sexual predators; they're people like you with the same number of limbs, the same lives and interests and the same aspirations, and they have the same right as you to be treated exactly the same. Even now in 2006, us homos are still most certainly not treated the same as everybody else, but we're getting-there, and whilst I agree that it would have been nice to have got this far without marching, shouting, campaigning, whining and bitching, you have to accept that this is the only way that any progress is ever made. Sadly, people's perceptions and attitudes don't change unless you hit them with a few reality checks.
Oh, and the Navy marching through London? Well, contrary to your comments, the MoD has every need to "reach out" particularly to large chunks of the population such as ours. It's not as if we're a small group - we represent something like twenty percent of the population (the "one in then" catchphrase is an urban myth). You can bet that more than a few young people will have been encouraged to see that it is (finally) possible to wear a RN uniform and openly announce your sexuality without fear of so much as a sideways glance, and hopefully a few more people will join their ranks as a result. If the MoD maintain this kind of attiude, it might not be too long before we reach that happy stage where we don't even know why we ever regarded homosexuality as even being an issue. Imagine!

[Monty77]

Moderator.

You are a coward.

Put my reply back on here or admit that you are BIASED. I do not have to approve of homosexuality but will tolerate it.

Nothing I wrote should have been offensive to anybody who is prepared to accept that not everyone shares their view.

Why did you scrub my post?

[Monty77]

And while I'm at it, it seems perfectly OK to start a thread named 'Why nobody likes the RAF Police'.

I wonder how long a thread named 'Why nobody likes homosexuals' would last discussing the shabby appearance of naval personnel strolling down a public street in loose unmilitary-like order with whimsical smiles on their faces.

Gay mafia mods here indeed.

[movadinkampa747]

One of my posts has been clensed by the mods. Isnt that discrimination against straight people? I noticed Tim edited one of his post and as a result ours seem to have gone. Great..................:mad:

[TheInquisitor]

...And yet he is still allowed to preach his propaganda without fear nor prejudice. Isn't that curious?

Tim, let's cut the crap here. You said ONE thing that was correct - the "one-in-ten" thing is indeed an urban myth (as is most of the crap spouted by the Kinsey institute for the last 40 years). But 20%? Show me ONE piece of objective evidence that supports this. Even gay pressure groups are starting to admit that their previous estimates are bollox. I've read that Stonewall are now giving "1 in 20" (5%) as a figure, but that even this is primarily based on "assumptions" (they don't say what these assumptions are).

It is NOT the fact that queers are in our midst that pisses us off (yes, Tim, "Queer" IS an acceptable word to use according to many in the gay "community") - it's the constant preaching, marching, shouting, banner waving, finger-wagging and "straight-bashing". Why don't you lot just accept that most people will accept you, some never will, wind your necks in and just live your lives as ordinary citizens as the rest of us do?
but we can't allow a modern society, and particularly our armed forces, to continue condoning the kind of attitudes that are better suited to early Carry-On films.
WHY not? Everybody has the RIGHT to their own views - who are YOU to say what 'modern society' should allow? You have no more right to dictate social norms than anybody else. Do you think that being gay somehow gives you this right?
sniggering comments, sideways looks, whispered rumours, or worse still, abuse, maybe even violence
The vast majority of people, at some point in their lives, have to suffer this, for a multitude of reasons - being somehow 'different' from those you live or work amongst, having something that makes you stand out, makes you a target. Perhaps being overweight, coming from a different area or socio-economic group, being considered "odd-looking" or "ugly", being just some examples. This is NORMAL - it is part and parcel of human nature. Why should being gay somehow give you the "right" to be insulated from the norms of human society, a "right" that none of the rest of us normal folk have?

Do us a favour, Tim, and take your preaching and your made-up statistics elsewhere. We are sick to the back teeth of it.

[Monty77]

And another thing!

Who is moderating the mil forum?

All the other forums appear to show a profile of the mod for that forum.

Could it possibly be that a homosexual civvy pilot is moderating this forum and deleting anything that does not fit in with his/her agenda?

Like I said in the post that was removed, I am not homophobic because I do not fear or am threatened by homosexuals. As long as they can do their jobs, fine. Do not expect me to affirm their status as a full-on way to bring up kids because I don't believe it.

Don't expect me to tell my kids that homosexuality is 'normal', because I don't believe it is, but won't harass or suppress those who do.

Go on, delete this post and prove that the moderator is the actual oppressor.:=

[raf_wannabe]

being somehow 'different' from those you live or work amongst, having something that makes you stand out, makes you a target. Perhaps being overweight, coming from a different area or socio-economic group, being considered "odd-looking" or "ugly", being just some examples. This is NORMAL - it is part and parcel of human nature. Why should being gay somehow give you the "right" to be insulated from the norms of human society, a "right" that none of the rest of us normal folk have?
Do us a favour, Tim, and take your preaching and your made-up statistics elsewhere. We are sick to the back teeth of it.

And you don't find that aspect of human nature abhorant? Condone bullying do we? Is this black, dark, slimey aspect of "Human Nature" acceptable to you because its "part and parcel" with what humans do? And I thought this website was inhabited by intelligent people wanting whats fair for everyone, freedom, happiness and a way to voice ones own opinion.

How dare you fire back at Tim for wanting to air in a few paragraphs what countless thousands of Stonewall, etc pressure group supporters spent decades lobbying for. It is very easy for people in the normal demographics to turn their noses up at the issues of the homosexual at the moment, because it does seems like its everywhere. And do you know what? It is I'm afraid. Its living next door to your house. Its down the NAAFI selling you a can of coke. Its the navigator sitting behind you at 30,000ft. Its your new born son who just wants to be loved by his father.

So grow up for gods sake. Preaching about the rights of the straight white male? No fight was ever required in modern Britain for your civil liberties. This is our day to shine and be noticed for what we are, normal, acceptable human beings who, in accordance with this thread, might want a married quarters while serving their country. Its been your way for so long, now it is the turn of everyone.

[movadinkampa747]

Ooooh hark at her..................... Did you not read the Four Bruces rules on joining up? Rules 1,3,5 and 7 in particular. I didnt write it:eek: The Philosopher's song was funny though

[Monty77]

By definition, you are not normal. The more hysterical you get in your behaviour to defend your sexual predilections, the further away from normal you become.

I am happy to work with people who consider buggery normal provided they don't attempt to enforce the view that this is 'OK', because I don't think it is, and the majority don't either.

I will tolerate the likes of you because I think toleration of certain behaviours between consenting adults is right.

I will not tolerate gay fascists. I will not tolerate the paedophiles in Holland who wish to reduce the age of consent to 12.

In no way am I likening homosexuals to paedophiles but you have to realize that there comes a point when the lid comes off, and you need to appreciate the tolerance you currently receive in your Safe European Home. Clash anyone?

OK. Let's watch the bloody mod kill this thread within the hour.

Knob.

[raf_wannabe]

By definition, you are not normal. The more hysterical you get in your behaviour to defend your sexual predilections, the further away from normal you become.

And by who's definition are homosexuals not normal as you put it? Yours? The Church? Because normality is not for you or anyone to judge. It is merely a statistic. And I would like to turn your point on its head by stating that views like yours are being pushed further and further from your precious "norm". The status quo is that Hetero and Homosexuals ARE equal. Your hetero fascist views are no longer part of that status quo and will die with you and people like you.

I will not tolerate gay fascists.

Nor will I tolerate Hetero Fascists.

[Maple 01]

It's funny the number of rabid homophobes that crawl out of the woodwork when anything like this crops up.

I was going to make a joke about the identification of ‘the gay mafia' but decided it was a little too close to Hitler's jump of logic with the Jews

I'm hard done-by
Jews are different
You don't see Jews suffering like us real people
Jews aren’t hard done by
They have protectors - they get advantages
And they are clannish
And look after their own

Therefore there is a Jewish mafia
It is oppressing the volk
Jews are vermin
We must kill the vermin

I'm hard done-by, Gay couples can get quarters, I can't
Gays are not normal
PC/Nu Labour protects Gays
And they are clannish (though we want them to stick with their own sort)
And look after their own

Therefore there is a .Gay mafia
It is oppressing white Anglo-Saxon heterosexuals
Gays are vermin
If I had my way.........

I will not tolerate gay fascists. I will not tolerate the paedophiles in Holland who wish to reduce the age of consent to 12.

Therefore Gay = paedophile? Pathetic

I used to wonder if, given the right circumstances, the UK could have produced its own Nazis

[camlobe]

Wow.
Has this thread become entertaining or what?

The best entertainment for eons has been 'why we all love plods'. Unlike that thread, there appears to have been considerable 'editing' here. I don't know how much as this is my first view of this thread.

What I can see here is, there are two sides who are quite vehement and committed to their own views, and a number of others who are passive.

I have no problem with people having strong views as long as they don't feel justified in forcing their understanding of opinions/views on the rest of society. If people are allowed to do this, they tend to become extreme in their views. These people then become known as extremists. Extremists are blind to all others and their views in a civilised world. And we know where that leads.

As to MQ's, I was a more relaxed husband (you do need a Marriage Certificate for that) and father (you don't biologically get that in a same-sex partnership) when we wern't living in an open house, generally known as a Married Quarter (you wouldn't believe how many people are 'entitled' to enter what is your home). I accept these 'entitled' types wern't all 'Little Hitler's', but I still didn't invite them around, and nor did my wife, and for most of them, they most certainly wouldn't have been on our Xmas card list.

Who's entitled to a MQ?
In this day and age (yes it really is 2006) it doesn't matter if you are straight or not. If the book says 'you are entitled' and it fits your needs (legitamite and legal of course), go for it. If you want a cetain modicum of privacy, allbeit at a price, buy or rent privately. I followed my own advice, and for myself and my family, it worked.

I have no intention of getting drawn into the 'straight-v-queer/gay' aspect of this thread. As a 'straight' 19 year old, I joined a 'straight' RAF, and 18 years later I left a 'straight' RAF in 1996 as a 'straight' 37 year old man and it worked for me. The 'modern' RAF has had to open it's doors to a wider cross-section of society while enjoying a diminishing budget and excessive committments.

I enjoyed my time in 'the mob', but I have no regrets about leaving. For me, there were just too many of the wrong kind of changes on the horizon. The passage of time has proven me correct.

camlobe

[Monty77]

This all still doesn't answer the the question:

Why is the un-named moderator of this forum still selectively erasing replies?

I personally find your desire to like it up the arse from a bloke unnatural and distasteful.

I also disagree with the Israeli reaction to Hizbollah rockets.

I disapprove of you banging in another consenting's bloke back door. But I will support your right to do it (in private). Just don't expect me to promote it. Don't expect me to tell my kids it's OK because I don't think it's OK at all.

You may like not communists, I may not like fascists. They're actually quite similar with regard to sexual tastes. I dislike aggressive homosexuals like Tatchell because they impose by 'outing' those who may have wished to remain quiet. Well, that's nice homosexuality, isn't it?

[Monty77]

Mod:

Well played, good health.

M7

[brakedwell]

Thank goodness I'm no longer a serving officer in the Royal Air Force. Married Quarter for homosexuals is a step too far. Having served for many years in Transport/Air Support Command, which entailed spending a lot time down the route, the thought of a couple of queers living in the next door married quarter and the message it was sending to my two young sons would have been very worrying, even distressing. I'm sure a high percentage of the wives would have felt the same. It would have been bad for morale, bad for pride in the service and due to an unhappy missus, bad for my marriage.

[Monty77]

Maple:

I made it very clear in a post that the moderator chose to delete that in NO WAY DO I EQUATE HOMOSEXUALITY WITH PAEDOPHILIA.

It is totally different, and if I were homosexual or heterosexual I would be livid if people thought I considered children sex objects. For F*cks Sake.

I'm getting tired of this. Accept the fact that some (actually, most) people will not be prepared to teach their children that 'Dave and Arsewipe' are valid parents and a good guide to what they may face in the real world. Gay bars only really apply if you are gay. Most people are not gay.

The last time I had the nerve to state this fact, half the thread was wiped by an individual who preferred to remain anonymous.

If you wipe it again, it proves you are biased.

Well?

[Tim McLelland]

And yet he is still allowed to preach his propaganda without fear nor prejudice. Isn't that curious? Not propoganda, just a few rather necessary points, I think youll find.Tim, let's cut the crap here. But 20%? Show me ONE piece of objective evidence that supports this. You can argue this until the cows come home, and much depends on how you frame the quation. Statistics recognise that there is something like ten percent of the population who identify themselves as gay. When you then add at least another ten percent (if not more-I'm being generous here!) of people who don't "identify" but are still patently gay, or at least engage in same-sex acts, you have a figure that is probably more than twenty percent, but hey, if you want statistics, go and find them, but try not to use the ones funded by the Christian Insituite eh?!
"Queer" IS an acceptable word to use according to many in the gay "community - yes I know, you can call me/us queer, faggot, bender, **** stabber, bum bandit, butt hole surfer, pickle smoker, cock jockey... so what? who cares?
who are YOU to say what 'modern society' should allow? I'm a gay man, that's who, and I have every right to be treated the same as everybody else. That includes not having to listen to people such as yourself telling me that they "accept" or "tolerate" me. I don't crow about how I "accept" you, and I don't really care what you think of me, why should I? The point is, it is time that society (and particularly organisations like the MoD) stopped encouraging or even allowing people to talk about gay people in this way. If they tried the same tactics against black people, what would you say?
The vast majority of people, at some point in their lives, have to suffer this, for a multitude of reasons - being somehow 'different' from those you live or work amongst - But that's the point - they don't have to suffer it at all, and people don't, as these days we have some opportunities to protect our rights as citizens, and expect other members of society to treat us the same as we treat them.

[Tim McLelland]

And another thing!
Who is moderating the mil forum?
All the other forums appear to show a profile of the mod for that forum.
Could it possibly be that a homosexual civvy pilot is moderating this forum and deleting anything that does not fit in with his/her agenda?
Like I said in the post that was removed, I am not homophobic because I do not fear or am threatened by homosexuals. As long as they can do their jobs, fine. Do not expect me to affirm their status as a full-on way to bring up kids because I don't believe it.
Don't expect me to tell my kids that homosexuality is 'normal', because I don't believe it is, but won't harass or suppress those who do.
Go on, delete this post and prove that the moderator is the actual oppressor.:=

Very generous of you to announce that you're not homophobic, particularly when you then proceed to announce that you don't "fear" or feel "threatened" by homosexuals! Thankfully, we don't have to seek your approval to bring-up kids, although it's a shame that you're evidently planning to teach your kids that homosexuality isn't normal. Your choice as a parent of course, but let's all hope that none of your kids turns-out to be gay, and spends heaven-knows how many years in complete turmoil, trying to repress his feelings because his father has told him they're unnatural. Way too many kids have committed suicide because of this kind of poisonous attitude so let's hope that you don't add any to the statistics.

Oh and by the way - what exactly upsets you about the notion of gay parents bringing-up kids? Do you think they'd chain them in a dungeon and molest them? Or is homosexuality infectious? I fear you've been reading The Sun for far too long...

[bwfg3]

Just returning to the subject of who is entitled etc... I'm married with 4 kids, two of them are starting/in middle of GCSE courses in the next school year and we live in quarters in the northern region. My posting was due this autumn and I've been told "Tough **** mate, your kids are not within 3 months of exams, so we are going to kick your family out of FQ and they must relocate with you in the south" and I quote " All schools are the same... its the national cerriccerlum (spelling as pronounced by DHE operator) mate " Dont get me wrong here fellas, I dont mind commuting for 3 years and living in the mess, but that option is not available to me.. so its all hands to the pump and try to buy here before I'm moved. To be fair to PMA they've delayed the posting to help.. but why should single people (of either persuasion) get quarters anywhere when those who have already been entitled for years get shafted by a civilianised system? And if they claim they are short of quarters at my present unit, it wont wash, as Annington have sold off 30% of the area I live in in the past 2 years.:ugh: P.S And dont get me started on MODern housing solutions (joke) ,3 months without a gas supply is probably a blessing with present price hikes.:rolleyes:

[Tim McLelland]

By definition, you are not normal.
Okay, at what statistical figure does something become "normal" in your bizarre world? Homosexuality is normal by definition, as people have always been gay, even if various societies have tried to pretend that they haven't. Maybe you need a new dictionary with a better definition of "normal"?


I am happy to work with people who consider buggery..
What is this obsession with buggery? How does this automatically connect itself to any discussion about homosexuality. Let's deal with an unpleasant fact here; not all gay men engage in anal sex. Likewise, very few gay women do (as you might imagine!). Also, a huge number of straight men engage in anal sex with their femal partners. So what is your fascination for this subject? Homosexuals are people with a sexual preference for someone of the same gender - that's all it means. So maybe you could keep your wild (and slightly suspect) sexual fantasies to yourself?


I will not tolerate the paedophiles in Holland who wish to reduce the age of consent to 12.
In no way am I likening homosexuals to paedophiles
er... so why did you say it then?


I don't consider myself a stident homo, militant, or anything else like that. This is not about any "gay mafia" and I don't know why any postings have been edited/moderated. As far as I'm concerned, if someone has something to say, then by all means say it - it's nice (or at least helpful) to know how other people really feel.

But let's not lose track of where we were going with this thread. My point was (is) that the Navy is making some good progress towards eradicating this childish "Carry-On" attitude towards gay people and they're finally allowing gay and straight people to be treated equally and with equal respect. I wouldn't expect any more than that nor would I expect anything less. It's time that insitutions accepted that a person's sexual orientation is a minor part of his/her character which is nobody else's business but their own, and that they don't deserve to be treated disrepectfully because of it. It looks like the RAF is slowly following the Navy's lead (but the Army seems to still be stuck in the 'sixties) so we can only hope that before too long, the subject won't even be an issue. Until then, you can only expect more whining and bitching from the so-called gay mafia, otherwise nothing will ever change for the better. History has taught us that unless you proverbially beat people over the head with your views, they choose not to listen to them. Admittedly, this wouldn't be a good thing if the views were in some way wrong, but thankfully our society is reaching a stage where we accept that homophobia is something that needs to be buried once and for all - despite the efforts of poisonous bigots such as the Pope, etc...

[raf_wannabe]

despite the efforts of poisonous bigots such as the Pope, etc...

Ooh Tim, you're going straight to hell for that comment! :=

Accept the fact that some (actually, most) people will not be prepared to teach their children that 'Dave and Arsewipe' are valid parents and a good guide to what they may face in the real world. Most people are not gay.

You're right. Most people are not gay :{ . And, alas, I am also inclined to agree with you on your point that parents won't teach their children about homosexuality. But thankfully in 2006 and beyond, homosexuality being displayed how it is, is meaning that the modern youth do not need their parents to teach them about it. Section 28 has been lifted. Youth groups talk openly about it. Organisations offer advice. The homophobic parent is left redundant. Loving and open parents embraced.

I'm sure you must be losing sleep now that same sex partners who have had a civil partnership can now adopt! :sad: I wonder if they will inflict their gay propaganda on the poor defenceless child they adopt? Or maybe they will grow up happy and wise, albeit in a homo-family. What HAS the world come to ey? Oh... equality and freedom for all. What a tragedy! :oh:

If you wipe it again, it proves you are biased.

No. It merely shows that pprune does not want its reputation to be smeared by views of people who disregard the views of everyone else. I don't think pprune would want some of the views of this thread put in the Daily Mail this monday. Moderator, I applaud your action. Cut their fingers off if you can to stop their drivel entering this forum ever again. :D

[k3k3]

Moderator, I applaud your action. Cut their fingers off if you can to stop their drivel entering this forum ever again. :D


Book burning next?

[Maple 01]

If it's AP3000 I'll bring the matches

[TheInquisitor]

McBell-End,
By definition, you are not normal.
Okay, at what statistical figure does something become "normal" in your bizarre world? Homosexuality is normal by definition, as people have always been gay, even if various societies have tried to pretend that they haven't. Maybe you need a new dictionary with a better definition of "normal"?
Medically, "Normal" is defined as a characteristic exibited by 90% of the population. Anything that falls outside this 90% is defined as "abnormal". Homosexuality is, therefore, Medically Abnormal.

That includes not having to listen to people such as yourself telling me that they "accept" or "tolerate" me.
By the same token, why should normal folks (see definition above) have to listen to militant queers telling them that they must accept or tolerate them? I don't have to accept or tolerate ANYTHING. My choice, my right. This kind of attitude is beginning to cause alot of tolerant people to become intolerant. I used to be FAR more tolerant than I am now.

despite the efforts of poisonous bigots such as the Pope, etc...
So, you demand that normal people tolerate you, and in the same breath post something that is DEEPLY offensive to many peoples' genuinely held religious beliefs. Well done.

raf_won'tbe,
And you don't find that aspect of human nature abhorant?
Whether it is right or wrong is not the issue. Human nature is eternally unchanging - neither you, nor any of your pinko buddies can do ANYTHING about it, so just learn to live with it. There is no other option.
How dare you fire back at Tim for wanting to air in a few paragraphs what countless thousands of Stonewall, etc pressure group supporters spent decades lobbying for.Yes, how dare I question the motives of the almighty gay rights lobby. How dare I defend myself and my beliefs in the face of militant queerdom. How dare I have an opinion of my own that doesn't fit current fashionable socialist claptrap. how DARE I!
It is very easy for people in the normal demographics to turn their noses up at the issues of the homosexual at the moment, because it does seems like its everywhere. And do you know what? It is I'm afraid.
No, it isn't.
Its living next door to your house.
No, it isn't.
Its down the NAAFI selling you a can of coke.
errr.....no, it's not there either...
Its the navigator sitting behind you at 30,000ft.
...or there..
Its your new born son who just wants to be loved by his father.
...and it MOST CERTAINLY is not there. (top tip, son: don't bring people's kids into this or you will have a sh!tstorm on your hands).
No, I don't see ANY of this gay utopia of which you speak. It is merely in your imagination (and the imagination of many, many other militant homos trying to over-promote themselves). Sorry, little boy, it's time to get out, see the REAL world and accept the reality of it.
You're right. Most people are not gay . And, alas, I am also inclined to agree with you on your point that parents won't teach their children about homosexuality. But thankfully in 2006 and beyond, homosexuality being displayed how it is, is meaning that the modern youth do not need their parents to teach them about it. Section 28 has been lifted. Youth groups talk openly about it. Organisations offer advice. The homophobic parent is left redundant. Loving and open parents embraced.
You are obviously a little boy with big ideas, and absoultely NO clue about bringing up children. Parents have much, much more influence over their children than any education system could ever have. This aside, there is hardly a school in the country that would DARE go near promoting homosexuality, because the vast, vast majority of normal parents do not want their kids indoctrinated by queer propaganda. FACT. So the fact that CLAUSE 28 has been repealed is neither here nor there. Deal with it.

So you think that parents who DON'T allow their kids to be indoctrinated with queer propaganda are unloving? You arrogant little s**t! Do me a favour, little boy, go away somewhere for a long time, get kids of your own, and GROW UP. There's a good lad. RAF_wannabe? I guess I'll see you in McDonalds one day, serving me my big mac...

To all the Homo-fascists here:

The world has NOT changed - people are just more careful about what they say within earshot of your kind. And the Armed Forces most DEFINITELY have not changed. Just because you don't get to hear what is said about you when you are not in the crewroom does NOT mean that we have gone all pinko-fluffy tolerant - because we HAVEN'T, and NEVER WILL whilst there are militant fag-fascists telling us what we may or may not think.

If you want tolerance, if you want acceptance, then try showing some - by accepting that some find homosexuality distasteful and wrong - and stop trying to FORCE people into acceptance. You cannot ENFORCE tolerance and equality; any attempt to do so invariably has the opposite result.

[Talk Wrench]

Having perused this forum from afar and only now being able to reply, I think that the original few posts had valid points as to the allocations of quarters to co-habiting homosexuals.

Some posters though,seem intent on politicising the fact that whether people do or do not accept homosexuality.

Fact. Gay people do exist and do not deserve to be bas****ised because of their sexual preference.

Fact. Gay people have been around us all for eons, but until only recently have had to remain in the closet for fear of retribution.

Fact. They are human beings like all of us.


I have a theory. And that is the most bigoted people are the ones who are just plain ignorant towards life or are confused about their own sexuality.

As for me, I am very content being a 30 something heterosexual male. Some of my colleagues are content with being of a different sexual persuasion than my own. It doesn't stop them being good people like it doesn't stop me being a good person.

Oh yeah, at one point in my life, I used to be anti gay, until a friend I had known for years suddenly blurted out in the naafi one eve that he was gay.I was more annoyed that he hadn't had the guts to tell me earlier.

Rant over

TW

[movadinkampa747]

Oh yeah, at one point in my life, I used to be anti gay, until a friend I had known for years suddenly blurted out in the naafi one eve that he was gay.I was more annoyed that he hadn't had the guts to tell me earlier.

TW

You used to be anti-gay? Was that like some disease or something? Was it like giving up smoking when your friend told you?

Why do you feel the need to tell us you sexual prferences? Is there something you are not telling us?
Why would you think being gay would mean gay people are not good people?

[Training Risky]

RAF Wanabee and the chap from Sheffield.

Do you plan to start your litigation diary from Day 1 IF you join the RAF?... leading to that all important compo claim in 5/10/20 years time?

Please let us know when people such as yourself form the majority of the 15 000-odd personnel in a few years time.... and I'll know it's time to leave.:ugh: :ugh: :ugh: :ugh: :yuk:

[C130 Techie]

So the gay/straight bigotted slanging match continues.

Right or wrong homosexuality is permitted in todays Armed Forces. I may not approve of it but I accept it provided they receive the same treatment and have the same rights as eveyone else.

I accept that there are issues with Married Quarters. Years ago it was straight forward married = quarter, not married = no quarter simple. Today the world is different not everyone chooses to marry, people, both heterosexual and homosexual, choose to co-habit, we have single parents both male and female. The balance has changed and system needs to update in a reasoned and fair way. I couldn't care less who lives next door provided they abide by the rules of occupancy which should allow every family to live in peace and quiet.

For those of you on both sides who are blighting these pages with your bigotry and prejudices my message is simple. Grow up or take your cr@p somewhere else.

Live and let live

[XL319]

I know quite a few gay people maybe closeted because of the biggoted attitudes some of you have in here....it's some people attitudes who think all gay men would try and come on to them (god knows how they come to that conclusion). I find it quite funny actually reading some of the posts. Going back to the crewroom comment, i've never heard people slagging people off behind their backs and my gay friends are great with my kids.

Just goes to show soceity isn't as tolerant as i first thought.

[Maple 01]

Medically, "Normal" is defined as a characteristic exibited by 90% of the population. Anything that falls outside this 90% is defined as "abnormal". Homosexuality is, therefore, Medically Abnormal.

Therefore being male or female is a medical abnormality? Welcome to the freaks!

[XL319]

What's "normal" is this day and age???????/

Are Jews Normal? Are black people normal? i could go on but don't think i need to

[ZH875]

Therefore being male or female is a medical abnormality? Welcome to the freaks!Surely if you are Male OR Female, you are in a medical Normality, it is only Male which is abnormal (approx 50%) or Female which is abnormal (approx 50%), but male or female is just about 100%, therefore normal.:)

The question is: What happens when Britain is ruled by the Muslims, who are taught/believe that homosexuality is abhorrent and against their laws, how will this fit in with the current fluffy PC correct brigade, who say that it is normal?. How can Britain be both a Muslim state and a PC correct state, surely one side will lose out? - But which one? and what will happen if the 'wrong' (select whichever you want) side wins?

[brakedwell]

The question is: What happens when Britain is ruled by the Muslims, who are taught/believe that homosexuality is abhorrent and against their laws, how will this fit in with the current fluffy PC correct brigade, who say that it is normal?. How can Britain be both a Muslim state and a PC correct state, surely one side will lose out? - But which one? and what will happen if the 'wrong' (select whichever you want) side wins?
When Sharia Law comes into force, instead of Gay Pride Marches there will be Public Executions of Gays and Adulterers and I will be six foot under - thank goodness.:* :* :*

[Tim McLelland]

This is why I said earlier that I think it's foolish to remove postings if they're deemed to be offensive. Patently, they're not offensive to gay people, as we've heard every possible variation on the name-calling theme, and it's water off a proverbial duck's back. I think it's more important that we hear what people think because, as you can see, there are still people out there who hold views that most people abandoned decades ago. It's important that we don't kid ourselves into thinking that we live in a tolerant and inclusive society because, quire clearly, we don't, although we're getting there-slowly!

I love the comments about being "normal" - I'd love to know what reputable source this notion comes from that in order to qualify for normality, you have to score ninety percent in the "acceptance league". What utter rubbish! It sounds so ludicrous that I'm inclined to think that it comes from a Christian Institute source, or something similar. Unfortunately, most "statistics" that are spewed out on homosexuality are bogus ones, pumped out my nasty religious groups such as the C!, and every thime the statistics are scrutinised, they're found to ge grossly and maliciously inaccurate. Besides, I just find the whole notion of having to meet an arbitary figure hilarious... "I'm sorry sir, you only rate at eighty-nine percent, therefore I'm afraid you're abnormal" ... what a laugh. Anyone with common sense knows that whether you like or approve of gay people or not, there's millions of us, always have been and always will be therefore, by definition, we're as normal as anyone else. But I guess if it makes a few bigots happy to call me "abnormal" that's fine, it's not as if I or anyone else cares, but it illustrates how desperate some people are to try and pretend that we don't even exist.

As you can see for some of these postings, some (thankfully not many) people still think that gay men are sexual predators that want to molest every man and boy they come into contact with. Nobody knows quite where this notion comes from, and frankly, some of these people are living in cloud cuckoo land if they think anyone (gay or straight) would give them a second look. Likewise, you can also see how some people seem to think that being gay revolves around buggery, even though it patently doesn't, and the act of buggery is just as prevalent between straight male/female couples as it with within gay relationships. It's fascinating to see how some people just can't grasp that homosexuality is (as the name describes) a sexual preference for a person of the same gender - nothing more, and every other belief, rumour, fantasy or accusation you might care to attach to the name is purely generated by your own mind.

No matter how you look at things, surely any right-minded individual must be glad that the MoD is making some effort to eradicate the kind of backward attitudes that some people have expressed on this thread. Naturally, nobody is going to be forced into condoning, liking or even tolerating gay relationships; the fact of the matter is that we don't need anyone's approval - we have a human right to be treated the same as everybody else and anyone who tries to treat us differently deserves, quite rightly, to be punished or penalised accordingly. That's the mark of a civilised society. It's encouraging that the Navy and (to a lesser degre) the RAF is trying to wipe-out the kind of "barrack room humour" that intimidates or offends gay people. We can take a joke just like anyone else, but we all know that some attitudes go way beyond humour. The armed forces are no place for homophobia and the sooner the subject is no longer an issue, the better for everyone - no matter what side of the pink fence you might live on.

[tablet_eraser]

Who the hell is moderating this forum and why the hell has s/he deleted posts from me and Monty77 that simply made opposing points?

For f:mad: k's sake, if you're going to delete something have the guts to tell us why.

[MR12]

MR12, you've heroically missed the point, I fear.
I can quite understand that some people might well get sick and tired of political correctness - I do too, but this subject has lots to do with the RAF and MoD. You'll be only too aware of the acute problems that the MoD is having in terms of recruitment, and it makes perfect sense to "put one's house in order" to ensure that no member of the public feels excluded from the opportunity to join the armed forces. On a wider theme, just from a moral viewpoint it has to be a good thing too, doesn't it?
I think that from your persepctive, you're looking at this matter as if the MoD is making unfair efforts to cater for the interests of a minority group. Okay, if you look at it like that then it might seem annoying, but try looking at it from the perspecteive of a young gay man (or woman) who is just the same as any other lad, has a passion for aeroplanes or military subjects, wants to get through school and be a fast jet pilot or join the Army or whatever, and what does he think? He gets a mental image of sniggering comments, sideways looks, whispered rumours, or worse still, abuse, maybe even violence, all because he merely has a different sexual orientation which doesn't render him any less capable of doing his job, or living his life in just the same way as anyone else.
I quite agree that political correctness is a mixed blessing which often annoys rather than impresses, but we can't allow a modern society, and particularly our armed forces, to continue condoning the kind of attitudes that are better suited to early Carry-On films. Gay people (okay with some exceptions) are not limp-wristed, pink-wearing, girly sexual predators; they're people like you with the same number of limbs, the same lives and interests and the same aspirations, and they have the same right as you to be treated exactly the same. Even now in 2006, us homos are still most certainly not treated the same as everybody else, but we're getting-there, and whilst I agree that it would have been nice to have got this far without marching, shouting, campaigning, whining and bitching, you have to accept that this is the only way that any progress is ever made. Sadly, people's perceptions and attitudes don't change unless you hit them with a few reality checks.
Oh, and the Navy marching through London? Well, contrary to your comments, the MoD has every need to "reach out" particularly to large chunks of the population such as ours. It's not as if we're a small group - we represent something like twenty percent of the population (the "one in then" catchphrase is an urban myth). You can bet that more than a few young people will have been encouraged to see that it is (finally) possible to wear a RN uniform and openly announce your sexuality without fear of so much as a sideways glance, and hopefully a few more people will join their ranks as a result. If the MoD maintain this kind of attiude, it might not be too long before we reach that happy stage where we don't even know why we ever regarded homosexuality as even being an issue. Imagine!
Actually I don't think I have. I am aware that the MoD has a significant problem with recruiting and retention, but let's have a look at the full range of issues facing it as it tries to enlist and keep today's young people : pay rates lower than for less demanding civilian jobs; an unwillingness to accept imposed discipline; regular tours in unpleasant places with a real risk of being blown up, crippled or starring in an Al-Qaeda video; the antipathy to the Iraq war and to a lesser extent Afghanistan, and the belief that the armed forces are just pawns for neocons to play with at will; kit shortages; decidedly iffy support from the seat-warmers in Whitehall (to put it mildly); stories of bullying by sadistic NCOs; family pressure to get away from all of the above so that husband/dad's home more often, and people using archaic nasty words about gays. I'd love to see the proof that the last-mentioned is clear and away a significant threat to recruitment, just as I'm waiting for the conclusive proof that homosexuals make up 20% of the population. If you are, fair enough, but please quote your sources.
Can't afford to exclude particular segments of the population ? No indeed; the forces - RAF and RN more than army - often need skill more than grunt now, shouldn't care where they find them and should care about retaining them, but given the conditions in which every member of the armed forces can find themselves not even the most technologically advanced military in the world can afford to pander to individuals who can't hack the military's particularly scatological humour and sometimes brutal behaviour. Contrary to the wishes of the political class, the armed forces are not the Guardian Readers' Travel Club or the militant wing of Oxfam. Yet.
Let me reiterate my original point in a different way and hope that we can reach some kind of understanding : hectoring people doesn't work. Gays in the armed forces suffer intimidation and abuse ? I can believe it, and it's wrong, but every sub-group (black/Jock/Paddy/Taff/whatever) and most individuals in the armed forces suffer that during training and during their careers - humans are animals, a group is a pack and a perceived difference is always picked on. The single most important thing you can do from day one of training is to stand up for yourself; hit back with similar humour and argue the toss (it works more often than you think), use your fists if you have to and draw in the chain of command if that's beyond you. The armed forces do care about keeping people who've cost them money to train and most officers and NCOs will put aside any personal phobias to do something about genuine bullying. One bet I'll gladly lay here and now though is that demanding that the head shed stops people calling you a screaming bender will not change your oppos' attitudes one iota.
It does indeed take time to change perceptions, but more than that it takes rational debate - repeated ad nauseam if necessary - and example. Want to be a proud gay member of the armed forces ? Drop the 'gay' bit. Nobody in their right mind will care what happens between consenting adults unless you make an issue of it first.
I am not a number ! Oh no, hang on, I am. Sorry.

[SAR Boy Anchor]

Ignoring for a moment the obviously emotive topic at hand, I think that it is important that whoever has moderated this particular thread explains their reason for doing so. This is meant to be an unmoderated section, and if people don't say things giving away national secrets (of which there are lets face it there are very few, and those who do know them really should know better than to talk) or make openly illegal suggestions, then surely all other things should be fair game.


This particular topic is an important one. Having all in the UK military being made, up until 1998 to sign forms which stated which we thought homosexuality was incompatible with military life, it is unsurprising, if a little sad, that people have so much trouble adapting to the change.


Stopping debate, especially in such an underhand way as appears to have happened here, stops people being properly informed, and therefore unable to make balanced decisions. Look at history to see what happens when someone silently decides what infomation people should, and should not, receive.

[An Teallach]

Perhaps the Mod was just doing (particularly one of) the posters a very big favour. What was posted certainly had me convinced that poofs had no more right to exist on God's clean Earth than ...

Of course, convincing the rest of the PPRuNe community was never the issue for the poster. The big question is, how long can he convince himself?

How boring these threads would be if it wasn't for the traditional slew of ladies protesting too much.

[Tim McLelland]

a perceived difference is always picked on. The single most important thing you can do from day one of training is to stand up for yourself; hit back with similar humour and argue the toss (it works more often than you think), use your fists if you have to

Exactly - a perceived difference which will hopefully soon be gone, in the same way that ethinicity has. Once the "ooh he's a bender" rubbish has finally been consigned to the dustbin, we can grow-up and move on.

You're not serious about the "use your fists" bit are you? It rather devalues everything you've said if that's your solution to dealing with a dispute!

[Tim McLelland]

What was posted certainly had me convinced that poofs had no more right to exist on God's clean Earth than ...


But then if you'd actually read the posts, you'd have observed that nobody had ever even intimated that "poofs" had any more right to exists on "God's" (sic) Earth than anyone else...

[An Teallach]

Tim
I think your irony detector could do with a polish. I refer the Hon. Gent. to the last time (http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=189060) this forum was graced with a slew of ladies who didst protest too much.

[TheInquisitor]

If I WISH to protest, I shall do so. Are you saying this makes me gay somehow? Odd logic.

[Tim McLelland]

Tim
I think your irony detector could do with a polish. I refer the Hon. Gent. to the last time (http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=189060) this forum was graced with a slew of ladies who didst protest too much.

Think I'll take your word for it - I don't fancy wading through that lot!

[Joe Black]

This has turned into a rather controversial post - it was not intended!!

[Monty77]

Well Joe, you spotted what I wrote before it was wiped. It wasn't offensive. It merely stated that I personally do not approve of homosexuality but will tolerate it, because I think tolerance is a key to civilised society. I can't be a*rsed (pun intended) to spend hours at the keyboard spouting off like that McLelland bloke.

I'm not religious, but I know that calling the Pope a bigot is deeply offensive to 20 million or so Catholics (I made this number up). But that's OK because a gay bloke said it. What I find more disturbing is that the moderator of this site started selectively editing this site without the telling the poster why. Some time back I made a post under the influence which referred to perceived national characteristics, i.e. Scottish people are tight. It was supposed to be light-hearted and not meant to offend. The mod jumped in with 'deleted due to racist rant'.

That's fine. Didn't agree, but you accept the ref's decision-type thing. You wonder what else has 'disappeared'.

So just so we all know..... will the moderator introduce himself?

[Monty77]

Just googled number of Catholics in the world. 151 million.

McLelland - don't go to South America anytime soon.

We'd all miss you........savagely.:rolleyes:

[brickhistory]

Hmmm, if the MILITARY AIRCREW FORUM's purpose is: for the professionals who fly the non-civilian hardware, and the backroom boys and girls without whom nothing would leave the ground. Army, Navy and Airforces of the World, all equally welcome here, me thinks one of the most strident posters on it is really not qualified.


We now return you to your regularly scheduled posts.

[SAR Boy Anchor]

Surely we can all agree for the moment that the important question is not, what was moderated, but instead who is doing the moderating?

[Joe Black]

It would be interesting to see who is doing this - Monty made some very valid points and had them taken off! Why does Tim McLelland's posts stay as I am sure they could be equally offensive to others?

[Wrathmonk]

Hmmm, if the MILITARY AIRCREW FORUM's purpose is: for the professionals who fly the non-civilian hardware, and the backroom boys and girls without whom nothing would leave the ground. Army, Navy and Airforces of the World, all equally welcome here, me thinks one of the most strident posters on it is really not qualified.


Can we go for total thread creep and start up the old argument of having this forum as a closed forum, and only available to those that qualify as one of the above. Then we can be formally moderated and, furthermore, at least we'll know who said mod is!:E End of the day Danny lays down the rules and if I remember correctly its all based on the "hotel lobby" principle. His ball, train set or whatever therefore we play by his rules! He doesn't have to explain them to anyone. Don't agree with his policy then don't post. And no, I'm not a mod in disguise!

To get back to the original topic, if you want a FQ then either get married or get legally partnered with your same sex partner / best mate. Personally, by choice I would do the former before the latter (my choice, not an anti-gay slur) but whichever I did I would rather rent or buy my own place than live in a 1960's house under 1950's (at best) rules and conditions.

However, to keep the tradition of thread creep alive and well can we have a closed Military Aircrew forum please?:E

[brickhistory]

However, to keep the tradition of thread creep alive and well can we have a closed Military Aircrew forum please?:E

I'm agin' it, but it is Danny's playground, so his rules. My post about "not qualified" was to, hopefully, subtly signal at least one 'guest' that to come in is fine, even pop off occassionally if you want, but to take up lots of bandwidth to preach when he is not technically part of the forum's intended audience, is just rude.

[Monty77]

I agree.

Well Danny?

Polite request.

[XL319]

I didn't know homosexuality needed your approval Monty77 :} But seriously, live and let live at the end of the day we all wipe our backsides with the same stuff (no pun intended)

[Monty77]

Sadly I'm going to miss out on this for the next few weeks as I am off to defend the rights of those with whom I disagree but will defend with my life.

Timmy Bell-End. What's your tartan. It's not Burberry is it?

Moderator. Go to Arrse. Tough up and realise that even on the internet, on a site like this, you cannot erase stuff with which you disagree or you will lose all credibility with the particular community you seek to encourage. Start a gay military aviation site if you want and see how many will advertise on it.

Thought so. See ya.

You're still an anonymous knob in my book

Go public.

[Monty77]

XL

Homosexuality is not something that needs my approval. It exists and it always will. I just don't approve. What's the snag? I don't approve of the Israeli action in Lebanon.

Got a problem with that?

[An Teallach]

You're still an anonymous knob in my book

As opposed to the well-known artist known as Monty77? I must have missed your full name, photo and home address on your profile. :hmm:

The Mods tend, by and large, to leave us alone on Mil aircrew and only step in when folk post tripe that is intentionally abusive and/or has nothing to do with the purpose of the forum. PPRuNe tends to conduct its business on a rather more gentlemanly level than arrse. Long may it continue, IMHO.

Joe Black erronoeously thought that gay folk were denying him married accommodation (overall you'll be lucky if, of the stock of thousands of quarters, more than a dozen are occupied by gay couples). Quite why that was seen as an invitation for those with an inordinate interest in homosexuality for apparently straight folk to vent their loathing, is beyond me.

I'm a card-carrying poof and this is my 5th post on this thread. If number of posts is indicative of interest in a subject, your interest in things gay would appear to be more than twice as great as mine, Monty! :}

Wishing you all the best in whatever sandpit you will be fighting in for the next few weeks.

[Monty77]

Haven't posted 'tripe' and will not. Will not be hounded out of a military mil aviation forum by the likes of you.
Still asking the moderator to justify the deletions/moderation that went on earlier. This is not forthcoming.
I do not like homosexuals but will tolerate their right to legally practice what they do. I will not condone or approve it.
If you you can do your job, you're ok by me, and when it all goes bandy bollo then the judgement is reserved for the debrief. I suspect that AT is not mil.
Off to the sand pit.
Sand is not pink
Mod is still a knob for not fessing
AND I'M STILL PAYING TAXES

[Monty77]

AT

What do you mean, leave us alone?

Some anon mod has been carving the **** out of this thread.

Justify.

[Monty77]

It's bloody happened again!

Some invisible mod has hacked stuff out.

OK. You read what Danny wants. Bye.

[Maple 01]

It's been a pleasure......bye, er.......not in the sense of Bi you understand, oh no, I'm sure from the indignant posts he's a red blooded hetro with no issues. Just to be sure, AT, bring forward the 8 pints of 'old trouser loosener' and the key to the closet, if you please;) Just a routine check you understand.....

[An Teallach]

Maple, old chap. I fear Monty is well beyond the 8 pint stage and, since I'm only on my 1st Lagavulin, I don't think I'll pluck up the 'dutch' or the notion to go there! :uhoh:

Monty, one right - AT is not mil, he is now a fully qualified civvy after 15 years in the mob; one wrong: I hate to tell you, but sand can be pink. I only hope your sensibilities aren't upset by being made to fly in anything in desert pink livery.

http://www.lastrefuge.co.uk/php/show-aerial-big.php?aerial=DH0276

[16 blades]

It's bloody happened again!

Some invisible mod has hacked stuff out.

OK. You read what Danny wants. Bye.

Pretty sure it's not Danny - he's not that childish or stasi-like.

Unlike some of the other Mods in here.

16B

[XL319]

They say the ones most against it are the closest to it

[tablet_eraser]

Monty,
Bear in mind that the mod deleted my posts too. Hopefully you'll agree that
I wasn't being inflammatory or offensive; merely having a fairly civilised
debate with you about an issue we both feel concerned about. Although we're
on opposite sides of the fence, I don't think we were being offensive,
vindictive, hateful or libellous: so why delete the posts? It pi$$es me off
that whichever anonymous coward did it doesn't even have the balls to tell
us why he's doing it. If he's so concerned, maybe he should go back
to the older threads and remove all my posts there too. And yours. And
16B's. And AT's. And, indeed, anyone else who dares to voice an opinion on
this subject.
No? Thought not. Maybe a debate over a few pints would be a better option
anyway.
Well, whatever. It was good debating with someone who doesn't resort to PC
cr@p or reactionary rubbish, and I wish you all the best when you go
sandyside. Stay safe.

[Monty77]

Cheers tablet, that's a post with which I heartily agree!

All the best

Monty :ok:

[teeteringhead]

In the old days the Mil forum was un-moderated ..... the Mods for each of the fora used to be published on the index page and we were left to self-police......:(

[Radar Muppet]

I don't have anything to say on this thread except for 2 points:

1. Some of the posters (on both sides) should hang their heads in shame; it is like a school playground at the minute.

2. If this forum is overmoderated (I can't judge because I obviously don't know what was deleted) then start an another website for military aviation and have it members only. Then Danny et all (with revenue loss) might revue their moderating policy.

RM

[ORAC]

Then Danny et all (with revenue loss) might revue their moderating policy. I do like a show. You reckon Danny will sing a song or play an instrument.... :}

[Tim McLelland]

Just googled number of Catholics in the world. 151 million.
McLelland - don't go to South America anytime soon.
We'd all miss you........savagely.:rolleyes:

Number of screwed-up people who base their beliefs and lifestyle on the teachings of a grossly over-translated book (no honestly, a book)... 100 million-plus? (this takes into account a generous estimation of approximately fifty million people who presumably think their religion is as flawed and ridiculous, and downright dangerous as everyone else...)


Oh, and as I've already said, I don't agree with posts being removed either - I'd rather hear what people have to say - so don't go blaming me on that one!

[Monty77]

Honestly, this is the last time I can post for a month or so.

McLelland. I'm interested to hear your views on the Muslim take on your sexuality. Like I have said on numerous deleted posts, I'm not religious and believe in toleration. There are a damn site more Muslims in the world than Catholics but you seem to believe that your sexual orientation rises above the considerations of those who hold these two religious beliefs. There are an awful lot of people who suscribe to these religions and they don't live in UK.

You appear to be unable to compromize. I personally would not walk around Glasgow at night in an England shirt.

You appear to demand the right to have your 'gayness' affirmed by everybody, all the time. It simply won't work. It's a big world and lots of people do not agree with you.

Tablet eraser comes across as a guy who is reasonable. I respect that.

You come across as a Tatchell.

Unfortunately I cannot continue this debate as I'm off tomorrow. So, I can't respond to anything you may choose to post from here on in.

Crack on. Tablet came across as the sort of guy with whom you can agree to disagree but still get along famously. That's how it should be.

Joe Black: hope all this helps!:ok:

[Joe Black]

Cheers Monty, enjoy your time in the sandpit!(presuming that's where yr heading)
Joe

[Tim McLelland]

you seem to believe that your sexual orientation rises above the considerations of those who hold these two religious beliefs.

Duh, yeah I think so - I was born gay but unless I'm mistaken, nobody is born Catholic or Muslim, are they? So of course a person's sexuality is just a teensy bit more fundamental than a religious choice. Or maybe you're also one of these wierdos that thinks that people choose to be gay 'cause they like the clothes or something?!

You appear to demand the right to have your 'gayness' affirmed by everybody, all the time. It simply won't work. It's a big world and lots of people do not agree with you.

Not at all - frankly I (and most other people) don't care what you think one way or the other. Thankfully we now have a society which ensures that we're treated fairly and equally, regardless of the dark looks of disapproval from the odd bigot or backward societies that judge people on the basis of what they've read in some book, or heard some wierd guy in drag preaching on a Sunday morning..

[Daffyd Jones]

I tried to get a civil partnerships but it was much too difficult. See, I'm the only gay in the village!

[DON T]

Not wanting to look like the devil's advocate, but are lesbians allowed married quarters as well?:confused:

[XL319]

do we really need to answer that one? Thought it's fairly self-explainatory

[Regie Mental]

Tim

It is of course true that nobody is born Muslim or Catholic, but nobody is born a journalist either - so what's your excuse? :8

[The Masked Geek]

Just to throw this particular cat amongst....

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/10/13/wgay13.xml

[dolphinops]

Just returned after a few days to find my post removed.

What was wrong with the word "Hoop"?? :E