Hello Sailor?!
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Reveille! Reveille!
How disappointed I am to read the 'Hello Sailor' thread. Firstly pprune is an inapproaiate chamber to debate this topic and that so many have and with such adolescent reasoning I now understand why CRM is drummed into commercial operations. I cannot speak for current military ops.
However, I can speak of my own experience as a former RAF Firefighter travelling the world and completing my service engagement without a hitch despite my homosexuality. In my day it was a criminal offence with disgrace written on discharge papers. When I left service I joined the lobby to force parliament to change the law.
I still attend parliament. Currently the Armed Forces Bill is being considered and of the three sessions I have witnessed I consider the MOD and the Armed Forces are in for a rude awakening in 2008 when the bill becomes law. For unlike Vice-Admiral Adrian Johns, who is tasked on a mission for inclusion, his predecessors proved themselves negligent in their responce to adapting to comtemporary values (one of the major reasons why recruiting and retaining service personnel is at a dangerous low).
What I must ask is; why this matters to you? Is it any of your business? If it is, why?
However, I can speak of my own experience as a former RAF Firefighter travelling the world and completing my service engagement without a hitch despite my homosexuality. In my day it was a criminal offence with disgrace written on discharge papers. When I left service I joined the lobby to force parliament to change the law.
I still attend parliament. Currently the Armed Forces Bill is being considered and of the three sessions I have witnessed I consider the MOD and the Armed Forces are in for a rude awakening in 2008 when the bill becomes law. For unlike Vice-Admiral Adrian Johns, who is tasked on a mission for inclusion, his predecessors proved themselves negligent in their responce to adapting to comtemporary values (one of the major reasons why recruiting and retaining service personnel is at a dangerous low).
What I must ask is; why this matters to you? Is it any of your business? If it is, why?
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 383
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
T4urtle,
It matters to me because I am gay and happy to serve in an organisation that recognises my contribution without considering my sexuality.
This thread has been remarkably reserved compared with previous discussions on the topic; maybe that's a good sign. If gay personnel are permitted to march in a gay pride parade, rest assured it will only happen after extensive consultation on the subject. That is exactly what is happening at the moment. It's not something done lightly, and there have been some timely, well-thought and logical arguments for and against participation.
It matters to me because I am gay and happy to serve in an organisation that recognises my contribution without considering my sexuality.
This thread has been remarkably reserved compared with previous discussions on the topic; maybe that's a good sign. If gay personnel are permitted to march in a gay pride parade, rest assured it will only happen after extensive consultation on the subject. That is exactly what is happening at the moment. It's not something done lightly, and there have been some timely, well-thought and logical arguments for and against participation.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 1,777
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It matters to me because I am sick to the back teeth of having homosexuality thrust into my face with monotonous regularity. Having served for nearly 40 years, I couldn't care less a person's sexual preferences, colour, politics, religion, et al provided they didn't try to convert me to their way of thinking or acting.
Like it or not, the Forces have had to change their ways and beliefs in accordance with the latest laws of the land and social trends. That they have done. I would really like to have the minority groups give it a rest and let the Forces get on with job without any further trendy ideas being thrust upon them.
And yes, I did do EO training and frankly I found it insulting that the assumption was made that I was racist and had to have it trained out of me. See my second sentence.
Now can we get on with serving the country without giving the gutter press whoopeedoo banner headlines to sell their rags.
Like it or not, the Forces have had to change their ways and beliefs in accordance with the latest laws of the land and social trends. That they have done. I would really like to have the minority groups give it a rest and let the Forces get on with job without any further trendy ideas being thrust upon them.
And yes, I did do EO training and frankly I found it insulting that the assumption was made that I was racist and had to have it trained out of me. See my second sentence.
Now can we get on with serving the country without giving the gutter press whoopeedoo banner headlines to sell their rags.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 383
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FJJP 
Seems the Forces have yet to learn about the concept of "compassion fatigue". You're no different to most of the rest of us who are utterly sick to death of EO briefings, equality seminars, ethnic monitoring surveys, attitudinal analysis, etc etc.
People should get a single EO lecture when they join up, NOT every time they get posted. Constant lectures, especially of the patronising variety, have the opposite effect, leading people to believe that minorities have more rights than the majority.
Seems the Forces have yet to learn about the concept of "compassion fatigue". You're no different to most of the rest of us who are utterly sick to death of EO briefings, equality seminars, ethnic monitoring surveys, attitudinal analysis, etc etc.
People should get a single EO lecture when they join up, NOT every time they get posted. Constant lectures, especially of the patronising variety, have the opposite effect, leading people to believe that minorities have more rights than the majority.
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Up North
Posts: 801
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is clear that the removal of the bar on serving gays in 2000 did not lead to the sky falling in, a mass outbreak of sodomy in the trenches or any other of the ludicrous scenarios that the doom-mongers predicted. It allowed personnel to serve their nation and offer up their skills without having to live a life of deceit under fear of exposure and punishment, or unfairly suppress their private lives.
So why should participation in Gay Pride parades not be allowed? I would not oppose such a move, but it needs to be undertaken with caution and with fairness to the diverse membership of the Armed Forces who are drawn from many backgrounds, cultures and traditions.
One overriding principle of the Armed Forces is that of impartiality. The Armed Forces may not take part in overtly political activity. The reasons for this are self-evident. The definition of "political" is wide-ranging - its narrowest definition would be restricted to political parties or movements, and it can encompass organisations campaigning for social or cultural change or values.
The Gay Pride parades could fall in with the wider concept of political activity. The likelihood of this is lesser since the lowering of the age of consent and the inception of civil partnerships. I will admit that I am not greatly familiar with the aims of Gay Pride movements and I suspect that they are wide-ranging and not particularly controversial. Nevertheless, it is may be the case that the Gay Pride marches may coincide with political campaigning - such as the "outing" of political figures accused of double standards in public and private - and this issue needs careful consideration.
Another overriding principle of the Armed Forces is that of uniformity - everyone in uniform is treated in the same manner as they are part of a greater organisation and purpose. This principle may not be perfect, but it underpins the rank structure and discipline. If it is perceived that relaxations of the rules on public or political activities are made in certain cases (because of a prevailing public and political concern) and not in others, then resentment will be generated, with the principle of uniform treatment undermined. This is not an argument against the Armed Forces supporting Gay Pride marches, but relaxations cannot be made on a case-by case basis. Would it be appropriate for personnel to participate openly in parades and public activities associated with religious movements? What about St Patrick's Day Parades (which, incidentally, often exclude gay organisations)?
I think that allowing participation in Gay Pride parades would be a good thing. The great danger is that the MoD go about this in a ham-fisted manner with a thought-police list of "approved" activities in a knee-jerk response to prevailing concerns rather than considering the participation of Armed Forces personnel in the wider cultural activities of societly.
The relaxation of rules in this respect will also make the establishment of a Federation more straightforward - whether it is formed with MoD blessing, or from the grass-roots upwards.
So why should participation in Gay Pride parades not be allowed? I would not oppose such a move, but it needs to be undertaken with caution and with fairness to the diverse membership of the Armed Forces who are drawn from many backgrounds, cultures and traditions.
One overriding principle of the Armed Forces is that of impartiality. The Armed Forces may not take part in overtly political activity. The reasons for this are self-evident. The definition of "political" is wide-ranging - its narrowest definition would be restricted to political parties or movements, and it can encompass organisations campaigning for social or cultural change or values.
The Gay Pride parades could fall in with the wider concept of political activity. The likelihood of this is lesser since the lowering of the age of consent and the inception of civil partnerships. I will admit that I am not greatly familiar with the aims of Gay Pride movements and I suspect that they are wide-ranging and not particularly controversial. Nevertheless, it is may be the case that the Gay Pride marches may coincide with political campaigning - such as the "outing" of political figures accused of double standards in public and private - and this issue needs careful consideration.
Another overriding principle of the Armed Forces is that of uniformity - everyone in uniform is treated in the same manner as they are part of a greater organisation and purpose. This principle may not be perfect, but it underpins the rank structure and discipline. If it is perceived that relaxations of the rules on public or political activities are made in certain cases (because of a prevailing public and political concern) and not in others, then resentment will be generated, with the principle of uniform treatment undermined. This is not an argument against the Armed Forces supporting Gay Pride marches, but relaxations cannot be made on a case-by case basis. Would it be appropriate for personnel to participate openly in parades and public activities associated with religious movements? What about St Patrick's Day Parades (which, incidentally, often exclude gay organisations)?
I think that allowing participation in Gay Pride parades would be a good thing. The great danger is that the MoD go about this in a ham-fisted manner with a thought-police list of "approved" activities in a knee-jerk response to prevailing concerns rather than considering the participation of Armed Forces personnel in the wider cultural activities of societly.
The relaxation of rules in this respect will also make the establishment of a Federation more straightforward - whether it is formed with MoD blessing, or from the grass-roots upwards.
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Up North
Posts: 801
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by tablet_eraser
Constant lectures, especially of the patronising variety, have the opposite effect, leading people to believe that minorities have more rights than the majority.
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Scotland
Posts: 664
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FJJP
Couldn't agree more. I'd like to see the whole equality industry disbanded. What changes peoples' attitude is personal exposure to different groups of people. I recall one mate in the mess opining that he hated poofs who came to me later to say "of course, i didn't mean you!" (this was in the days before one could be open). Lovely chap, but not the sharpest pencil in the box.
I'm currently bombarded with offers from organisations to come and check out my business to see if it complies with the forthcoming disability discrimination regs (at £600 a day). Such offers are usually liberally peppered with scare stories about how much I could be sued for. They are all consigned to file 13.
Those of us who fought to change the old imbecilic policy (which was most tightly guarded by the senior closet queens in the MoD) did so so that folk could just get on with the job without 'special attention' from SIB & P&SS. Frankly, I find the current 'special attention' from the PC brigade almost as offensive.
Couldn't agree more. I'd like to see the whole equality industry disbanded. What changes peoples' attitude is personal exposure to different groups of people. I recall one mate in the mess opining that he hated poofs who came to me later to say "of course, i didn't mean you!" (this was in the days before one could be open). Lovely chap, but not the sharpest pencil in the box.
I'm currently bombarded with offers from organisations to come and check out my business to see if it complies with the forthcoming disability discrimination regs (at £600 a day). Such offers are usually liberally peppered with scare stories about how much I could be sued for. They are all consigned to file 13.
Those of us who fought to change the old imbecilic policy (which was most tightly guarded by the senior closet queens in the MoD) did so so that folk could just get on with the job without 'special attention' from SIB & P&SS. Frankly, I find the current 'special attention' from the PC brigade almost as offensive.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Cosford
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The point seems to have been missed here. I don't have a problem with gay people, one off my familiy is that way inclined. The point is that I just don't need or want to know. We rightly should not be bothered by anybody's race, creed or sexual orientation but please just keep it to yourself. If you want to be treated like everybody else then behave that way. Why do you have to hide behind the politically motivated gay pride movement? What would happen if we tried to have a hetrosexual pride march and rally? As a white male hetrosexual I am the one being repressed, what about my feelings? The EO brief I attended was so heavily slanted with the assumption that everybody is naturally racist and homophobic that I felt deeply insulted by it. You are part of the service, you have been accepted, now stop banging on about it and take a chill pill.
Secession from the Union?
Ya'll care to secede from the EU....maybe we would take yer on as the 51st State. At least we go with the "Don't Ask...Don't Tell" method. Granted the rate of discharges for homosexual behaviour is at all time highs but at least we take the view that it is "conduct" and not "proclivity" that is un-acceptable.
Just as many have said....do your duty...serve honorably...and keep your personal life private (as all should do)...and all is well. Please to recall we also bin those heterosexuals who violate the "fraternization" rules amongst ranks as well as homosexuals.
Military life sets different and in most cases, higher standards for personal conduct.
Just as many have said....do your duty...serve honorably...and keep your personal life private (as all should do)...and all is well. Please to recall we also bin those heterosexuals who violate the "fraternization" rules amongst ranks as well as homosexuals.
Military life sets different and in most cases, higher standards for personal conduct.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Cosford
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks but no thanks
SASless,
cheers for the invite but becoming the 51st state does not really appeal. Its bad enough serving under our Tone but serving under Dubya would be far worse. I do like the US policy on gays in the military though, don't ask don't tell, what a refreshing idea. Sounds like common sense which means we Brits will never adopt it.
cheers for the invite but becoming the 51st state does not really appeal. Its bad enough serving under our Tone but serving under Dubya would be far worse. I do like the US policy on gays in the military though, don't ask don't tell, what a refreshing idea. Sounds like common sense which means we Brits will never adopt it.
Do I sense some "drama" here?
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Scotland
Posts: 664
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No drama SASless, merely a calculated analysis of a policy such as DADT on the 'who benefits?' model.
It has been my invariable experience that the great majority of heterosexual men are bored witless by this whole subject and the most common reaction to the 'X is gay' news is 'So what, fancy another pint?'
Those who wish to maintain the closet are the only ones who tend to advocate DADT or exclusion policies, as they feel safer if all gay people are forced to occupy the same closet. God forbid you should have a class of gay people who are comfortable with their sexuality and don't really care who knows about it, they really scare the crap out of the closet queens because the old playground taunt 'it takes one to know one' is quite true.
The first snr officer I heard holding forth on 'keeping the fithy queers out' (now a Gp Capt) was universally known as Nancy among the JOs and even had to go on the wagon because when he was legless he tried it on with most of us. He was so far back in the closet he should have given his postal address as BFPO Narnia. The most loathesome, however, were some of the creatures in P&SS.
A careful read of last summer's Gay Pride thread reveals a couple of the species among our fellow ppruners.
It has been my invariable experience that the great majority of heterosexual men are bored witless by this whole subject and the most common reaction to the 'X is gay' news is 'So what, fancy another pint?'
Those who wish to maintain the closet are the only ones who tend to advocate DADT or exclusion policies, as they feel safer if all gay people are forced to occupy the same closet. God forbid you should have a class of gay people who are comfortable with their sexuality and don't really care who knows about it, they really scare the crap out of the closet queens because the old playground taunt 'it takes one to know one' is quite true.
The first snr officer I heard holding forth on 'keeping the fithy queers out' (now a Gp Capt) was universally known as Nancy among the JOs and even had to go on the wagon because when he was legless he tried it on with most of us. He was so far back in the closet he should have given his postal address as BFPO Narnia. The most loathesome, however, were some of the creatures in P&SS.
A careful read of last summer's Gay Pride thread reveals a couple of the species among our fellow ppruners.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Cosford
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is not a question of maintaining the closet, if you read my previous posts it should be clear that I am in the 'don't give a toss so get the beers in' school of thought. I merely believe that if you don't need to know then don't bother to ask. I certainly don't advocate a return to the bad old days of P & SS hounding people because of their sexuality. Sorry mate you have got the wrong end of the stick, no closets at this call sign.
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Scotland
Posts: 664
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No Worries, Dogfish. So your
was posted in error, since DADT does involve investigation and hounding of suspected gay people and remains a blackmailers' charter.
Glad to hear you're in the well-adjusted hetereosexual 'don't give a toss camp'!
I do like the US policy on gays in the military though, don't ask don't tell, what a refreshing idea.
Glad to hear you're in the well-adjusted hetereosexual 'don't give a toss camp'!
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Cosford
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Given that being a homosexual is accepted these days I fail to understand how DADT can be construed as a blackmailers charter. Nobody cares because the dark ages are long gone, consigned to the history books and rightly so.
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Scotland
Posts: 664
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You can't imagine that the potential loss of a livelihood and a career would not expose people to blackmail?
Remember DADT doesn't just mean that the gay individual shouldn't tell. It means anyone with a grudge can report an individual to the Mil Police. The scope for blackmail (and the concomitant security risk) is quite wide.
Remember DADT doesn't just mean that the gay individual shouldn't tell. It means anyone with a grudge can report an individual to the Mil Police. The scope for blackmail (and the concomitant security risk) is quite wide.