Gay Pride?

[Lima Juliet]

On the subject of choices...

Marmite drilling is not my bag...that IS my choice. Also as a hetero I have always employed the motto of "Why use the taxiway when the runway is perfectly serviceable?" Therefore, should it be my right to decide that people who do it for gratification are not my choice of people to hang around with?

As Devil's Advocate, if it's alright to shower and share a room/tent with gay men, then why can't I do the same with women that I am attracted to? (I have had varying degrees of sucess with regards to this in the past!). Equal opportunities? I don't think so...

LJ

PS If it were natural, I would have ovaries up my back-side!
PPS Taking cover...Remember this is a banter forum!!!

[Flatus Veteranus]

It is absurd to expect mature men (and "maturity" suggests that one's values, tastes and philosophy are at least stabilised, if not set in concrete) to change attitudes towards homosexual activity from abomination to acceptance within a space of a few years. It is not so many years ago that such activity in the armed services resulted in cashiering and probably imprisonment. The current relaxed attitude that the services are encouraged or obliged to adopt exposes the hypocrisy of the old hierarchy. Under the old regime it was common knowledge at the coal face in all three services that a certain number of individuals were bent. But they were often good soldiers, sailors or airmen; and so long as they behaved themselves with discretion, the straights usually ignored their eccentricities and did not not go squealing to the plods.

It is nonsense to expect servicemen to make a crash change of attitude to appease the PC liberals. A gradual integration would be the best way forward - perhaps with units "manned (?)" exclusively by gays.

Are there any suggestions for the RAF's first Gay Squadron? Number (Surely it must have a hole in it)? Colours? Heraldic badge? Motto ? (No prizes for "Botttons Up, Chaps!" unless you can supply a free translation into Latin)

[BEagle]

31


















Sorry! Old story and a cheap shot.....

[FishHead]

US policy has actually been changed to "Don't Ask, Don't Tell, Don't Harass".

Of course, the critical thing is "Don't Tell" - if you 'tell' someone (through being in a bar with a clientle that is all same-sex, in an online dating site, or through a private conversation overheard) then they will still kick you out.
The US forces have lost a ridiculous number of people because of this policy, including 20 Arabic linguists and 6 Farsi linguists in the last few years - if that isnt cutting off your nose to spite your face I dont know what is...

[BigX]

A new low

Quite appalled by this thread. Of the eclectic mix of intelligent, well-informed, humorous and occasionally downright piss-taking threads I've enjoyed on PPrune, this one is the very first I can honestly say has utterly appalled me within seconds of reading. It shames a fair number of the individuals who have replied so far.

I presume the opening thread was intended as light-hearted; but the disservice done to the military reputation by some of the replies is otherwise. One of my highs from 17 years as a member of the military flying community was that I recognised a generally tolerant bunch that worried little more than getting the job got done and done well - bombs on target on time, then a few tall frosty ones in the bar. Sure, jokes were made regarding sexuality, but at the end of the day, we all got on with the job and left alone what was none of our business.

Most importantly, however, and irrespective of your personal views on political correctness, the legalisation of homosexuality, or indeed whether or not Pink Elephant cocktails were a sensible drink to quoff in quantity at Goose Bay, the simple fact is that many non-military do read these threads. All they can possibly perceive from this particular thread is a group of outdated, bigoted individuals whose credibility in other, far more worthy, threads has been undermined by their ill-advised comments here – including those supposedly well-balanced replies that then caveat their sudden fear of being ‘outed’ with quips regarding hair-curling or packers. For heaven’s sake, grow up.

Agree with me or not; be homophobic, sexist or not – either is your right. However, please consider what image you are painting of our esteemed and extremely professional trade in the wider community before airing your views - condemned by the rest of society - so publicly. ‘Mein Kampf’ might have (briefly) enjoyed popular status, but history has since condemned that author as a right pillock too!


Warning! Air Attack Red!

[16 blades]

I do not give one solitary sh1t about the sexuality of the bloke next to me - the only thing that concerns me is whether or not he can do his job.

However, I personally find the concept of a bloke shagging another bloke truly sickening. For those who choose to partake in this practice, that is their business and is none of mine.

Agree with me or not; be homophobic, sexist or not – either is your right

Absolutely correct - as is my legal right to hold and express those views (Article 12, Human Rights Act ) - so why do you try to dissuade us from doing so?

this particular thread is a group of outdated, bigoted individuals

Replace that phrase with "Traditional social values" which, lets face it, are sadly lacking in today's excuse for a society, and a different picture emerges. I for one have always been proud of the fact that the Forces hold traditional values in high regard and do not readily sway with whatever fashionable wind happens to be blowing - it is part of our ethos, and as been for a long time. To play devil's advocate for a moment, explain why the vast majority who have held these traditional views for so long should be made to throw them out of the window overnight to appease a tiny, but highly vocal, minority?

your views - condemned by the rest of society

Really? What society is this, exactly? I think you'll find that a sizeable majority of men throughout society STILL find homosexual acts to be highly distasteful - the fact that most now have a 'live and let live' attitude does not change this. Perhaps the society to which you refer is the one where the politically correct minority are the ones who shout loudest and are heard most, but as usual the silent majority are just that - SILENT, and TOLERANT. One can tolerate something whilst still being physically sickened by it, as long as it isn't "rammed down your throat" (to quote an infamous WRAF!)

What really boils my piss is when the pinkos try to present homosexuality as 'natural' and 'of equivalent status' to a normal relationship. It is neither. Sex exists because we have a need to reproduce. One cannot reproduce by shoving one's nob up another bloke's arse, to put it bluntly. It is therefore not natural. Neither is it 'equivalent' to a marriage, for the same reason - marriage exists to provide a stable and balanced environment in which to raise children. A same-sex relationship is not a balanced environment, nor is it (according to most views) anywhere near as stable. And it is IMPOSSIBLE for a queer couple to 'have' a child - at least one of them, and possibly neither of them, will have ANY biological input to the process whatsoever. Mother nature, in her wisdom, has decreed that it takes 1 man and 1 woman to reproduce, a fact that we cannot change even in the most perverted of scientific endeavours.

As I said right from the off, I really don't care about a colleague's sexuality. In fact, I recently discovered that a bloke I have regularly worked with is a tail gunner. If there is something about you that makes you stand out, you will get banter for it. He did, in vast quantities, and took it as it was intended - banter. When somebody gets all huffy, and politically-correct about it, and starts counselling others to guard what they say, is when it becomes a problem IMHO.

I will speak as I feel. I am legally entitled to do so. You will not change the way I think, nor many others for that matter. Does that make me an 'outdated bigot'? Maybe, but that's just YOUR opinion, which is no more or less valid than mine.

16B

Edited to make clear: I am NOT intolerant or bigoted towards homosexuals, as I believe I have explained. I simply detest the politics of sexuality.

[FishHead]

marriage exists to provide a stable and balanced environment in which to raise children

Gosh.... I can think of so many examples which disprove this theory that I hardly know where to start...

[16 blades]

..and doubtless many examples from 'the other side of the stamp' that show 'stable' homosexual relationships.

Look at the situation as a whole, not just the few examples of peolple you know with bad marriages / several divorces behind them.

You may be able to quote me ten or even twenty examples to support your point. There are six BILLION people in the world. For your twenty I could point out TWENTY MILLION that support my view. That is MY point.

16B

[FishHead]

Actually, I was more thinking of the infertile straight couple... not much point them getting married now is there.

Nor any woman over the age of 40 (or so) - not without resorting to "scientific endeavours".

[tablet_eraser]

16B

Thanks! I'm obviously wrong - my being gay is totally unnatural. How silly of me to think that since I was born this way, it must be my Creator's intention for me to be gay. Obviously I'm a pervert who should have no legal rights to serve my country - in fact, maybe I should just castrate myself now.

For God's sake, man, things have moved on! We're not all vocal and nasty; I am not, and never will be, a fan of the likes of Peter Tatchell. I will not accept, though, that the Armed Forces should be run based upon "traditional values". Not long ago, "traditional values" included sexism and racism. I don't hear many people calling for those halcyon days to be restored. Well, not many people whose opinions carry any impact for the young personnel joining today. I'm guessing you don't fall into that bracket; I'm guessing you don't realise that the opinion of most of my new colleagues is that it's a good thing that gay personnel are not discriminated against.

Homosexuality IS natural. As natural, at least, as having red hair (a similar proportion of the general population), or having no earlobes (a similar proportion of the general population) or having two different coloured eyes (no idea). About 2-6% of the UK's population, according to recent scientific surveys.

This has nothing to do with "appeasing a tiny but vocal minority". It has everything to do with a simple recognition of the fact that my service is as valuable as anyone else's; therefore, why should I face intrusion and discrimination just because, as you so eloquently put it, I'm a "tail gunner", a "pinko", a "queer". For all that and everything, I'm a commissioned officer and I'm proud to serve alongside people who do not hold your outdated - yes, outdated - views on human sexuality.

Voltaire said, "I may disagree with what you say; but I will defend, to my death, your right to say it". Spot on. He also said that democracy should be about the majority protecting and respecting the minority. Maybe you could learn from that?

Finally; how dare you claim that my relationship with my partner is not "stable", or that it somehow lacks value? What the hell can you say to back that up? THAT I did find offensive. Just because I'm gay, doesn't mean I'm out to shag every man I can. Grow up, for God's sake.

[BEagle]

A 'pinko' used to mean someone who was a 'bed wetting liberal closet Commie' (or similar) in hick red-neck speak. Nothing at all to do with sexual orientation!

[tablet_eraser]

Beags

I know - and I'm not a bed-wetting commie liberal! Libertarian conservative is where I fit in on the political radar... though some think I'm somewhat more Right-wing on some issues.

That's why I'm offended when accused of being a pinko!

Cheers

Tablet "Il Duce" Eraser

[RiskyRossco]

Actually, contravening populist sociological theory, homosexuality is a choice. Biologically there are two states - male and female. With the accordant emotional "tendencies" and rôles.
Emotionally there are variegated degrees of conditioning, via family, social dynamic, public education institutions and humanist philosophical drivel. It's so prevalent and widespread that, in contrast with absolute moral and sexual training, those who hold to the truths of the latter are shouted down by the liberal majority and as many as are swayed by public groundswell of opinion.

No wonder so many are confused. If you stand for nothing you'll fall for anything.

And, for the record, I know and meet with a 'gay' friend regularly. Pillar of his family and quite witty. I am also what the liberal radicals would class as "Christo-fascist", or fundamental born-again Christian, yet I separate the 'sin' from the 'sinner'. Yes, he considers himself outside of God's redemptive plan ( only because he believes the lies) but that doens't mean I judge him on it.
I'm equally guilty of sin in other areas. We all are. That's the nature of sin, and it goes a long way to keep me humble in my attitude but - I'm still a work in progress. Glad that God's working it

[mystic_meg]

Time to lighten up a little.......

This thread is getting a little heavy......

so...

Who was the only 16 stone jockey to have ridden a Derby winner?....


























...........Lester Piggott's cellmate...

[henry crun]

tablet_eraser: Other terms for homosexuals have been used in this thread which you appear to object to.

Are these alternative definitions any different to the corrupted use of the word gay ?

[effortless]

Traditional values?

I wonder why we talk about rum, bum and the lash?

[Flap62]

Tablet,

A point has been mentioned several times on this thread but has not been answered by you or any of your "chums".
Males and females are not allowed to share communal sleeping and ablutions as the privacy of the individual must be protected. The fundamental principal behind this is that as heterosexual men find the female form (with many obvious exceptions!!)attractive, then there would be the temptation to look at them in a voyueristic way. The reverse is also true although to a lesser degree ie most women will not moisten at the sight of a well toned beer gut.
You have, by your declaration of sexuallity, stated that you find the male form sexually attractive. Why should you be allowed to share communal facilities with other men?
The answer, in short, is that you should not.
This would therefore mean that the military now have to provide 4 segregated accomodation and washing facilities, both at home base and on deployed ops. This is impractical in terms of cost, space and the fact that the military no longer have materiel to support this policy.
Before you launch into the old "homophobe" rant, I now work for an airline where the majority of male cabin crew are gay. I have absolutely no problem with this. I accept that an individual's lifestyle is their choice as long as it has no impact on anyone else.
In the military your sexual orientation has an effect on the operation. This is not to say that any individual is not capable of performing effectively, of course they are. However, if for example, I was part of a unit asked to deploy to an FOB where facilities were basic, I would be within my rights to refuse to share sleeping and washing facilities with a homosexual, just as a female could not be forced to live with males. This presents the local commander with a problem that he really doesn't need.

[Scud-U-Like]

Flap62, segregating male and female accommodation is simply a matter of convention. If this is proving such a problem, how come, four years since the lifting of the ban, I've yet to hear of one example? Doubtless PPRuNers would be the first to let us know.

In order to create perfect communal harmony, perhaps we could allocate OOA accommodation on the following basis:

Men
Women
Gay Men
Lesbians
Snoring Men
Snoring Women
Snoring Gay Men
Snoring Lesbians
Flatulent Men
Flatulent Gay Men
Flatulent Women
Flatulent Lesbians
Women who want the light on
Lesbians who want the light on
Men who want the light on
Gay men who want the light on
Men who stumble in pissed, just as you've got off to sleep.............oh, nearly forgot:

Bisexuals (single room)
Snoring bisexuals (single soundproofed room)
Flatulent bisexuals (well ventilated single soundproofed room)

I could go on. What is a detco to do?

[ZH875]

As long as you remember to split the Hossifers and Erks up as well.

Also remember as well as Men and Women, you need an area for members of the race previously known as WRAFs.

[Gainesy]

an area for members of the race previously known as WRAFs.

Dog Section.