If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options
Essential support for under 25s
Essential support for under 25s
Take a look around and enjoy reading the discussions. If you'd like to join in, it's really easy to register and then you'll be able to post. If you'd like to learn what this place is all about, head here.
Comments
Well your views and observations are related to British Life, not Military life and it's YOU who doesnt have a CLUE about how people react in battle, not me .... you can't, and won't observe that cos you're NOT and never will be a soldier. You're free to write about your opinions on what you observe in civillian Britian, but Military life is a whole different ball game .. stick to what you know about, and don't assume anything.
Wrong.
You made the generalisation, or assumption, that all gays and females WERE inferior to you .. again that's your opinion, but you can't relate that to any battle because you have NO experience of that .. you've only got your opinions on civillian life and you're assuming that the same happens in battle.
How wrong you are ..... SIR !!
There you go again.
You can't assure ME of anything, because 'YOU'RE A CILVILLIAN ' and you only things about civillian life .. as i do.
Police, and Police ARU's, can only deal with a certain level of intensity. After they've done all they can it's passed onto the Army .. just as the Iranian Embassy siege many years ago was. The same policy still applies to this day . not to petty 'Abbey National' incidents because the Police can deal with them, as they rarely escalate beyond their capabilities. <IMG alt="image" SRC="http://www.thesite.org/ubb/smile.gif">
I'd be grateful if you refrained from ridiculing facts and strategies that you know NOTHING about .. after all you're a civillian .. i'm not !! <IMG alt="image" SRC="http://www.thesite.org/ubb/biggrin.gif">
I look forward to your reply <IMG alt="image" SRC="http://www.thesite.org/ubb/biggrin.gif">
Visit Alzaweb <IMG alt="image" SRC="http://www.stopstart.fsnet.co.uk/smilie/guitarist.gif">
I have never been in battle, I've never killed anyone..I dont need to have been to know human nature.. Soldiers aint supermen, they are normal people..They go down the pub and get drunk like the rest of us. They have exactly the same attitudes, beliefs and morals as the average man on the street.
As for your premonitions, you have no idea what my career is gonna be, neither do I for that matter but you cant possibly say I'll never be a soldier..You tell me not to assume anything then do exactly that. hmm
Show me where I said anything of the sort..Please, show me one of my comments that goes anywhere near my opinion of gays..Oh will you look at that....I never said ANYTHING of the sort..I havent given any kind of views of gays in relation to myself, never have I said that any woman or any gay man is inferior to myself...Just where do you come up with this stuff? Are you confusing my posts with someone elses?
Sorry mate but you were the one that put a number on it...I know for a FACT that 90% of hostage situations in the UK are NOT handled by the SAS..Exactly how many hostage situations have you heard of that have involved the SAS? 90%..Please...Oh and thats not just my opinion, its fact. You say it doesnt apply to petty bank hostage situations but you applied a blanket term and said 90%...Next time specify what you actually mean.
Ah so you know the facts more than me...Ok go take a look at the official crime stats and show me that 90% of ALL hostage situations(which includes domestic incidents) in the UK were handled by the SAS...
Just because you claim to be a soldier doesnt mean you have any common sense.
"gender challenged"? where do you get that idea from? they're not gender challenged. gay people prefer having sex with members of their own gender. they do not have questions hanging over their OWN gender. transsexuals, THEM you might be able to refer to as "gender challenged".
if you dont like the word gay, and queer sounds like an insult in many cases.... you could always use homosexual. less chance to cause offence, and less chance to bollocks up your meaning entirely, like with "gender challenged".
Out of my mind. Back in five minutes.
I don't 'claim' to be a soldier i am a soldier.... and just because you 'claim' to be understand the way people react and socilalise doesn't mean YOU have any common sense.
And you've experienced frontline units have you?
Where exactly ?
Fact?? Where did you read this .. or did you experience this 'down the pub' as well ?? <IMG alt="image" SRC="http://www.thesite.org/ubb/biggrin.gif">
As i've said, i accept everyones point of view because everyone has a differing POV.
But, i'd also respect that people listen to my POV and not ridicule my opinions and experiences because they're more acceptable than 'fact' or 'media scandalising' .. i have the decency to listen to your opinions .. you do the same <IMG alt="image" SRC="http://www.thesite.org/ubb/biggrin.gif">
So you never wrote:
"I feel the same about gays in the military as I do about women in the military..Theres really no place for em"
and ....
"The simple fact is this...Gays cause division in the armed forces"
That's right, it must've been your alter ego .. the one that's homophobic <IMG alt="image" SRC="http://www.thesite.org/ubb/confused.gif">
Yes, I do read what you type. But how you can relate to 'frontline units' when you're 'down the pub' in civillian life is beyond me !! <IMG alt="image" SRC="http://www.thesite.org/ubb/smile.gif">
Visit Alzaweb <IMG alt="image" SRC="http://www.stopstart.fsnet.co.uk/smilie/guitarist.gif">
[This message has been edited by Powerslave (edited 17-08-2001).]
Nope never have, never claimed to have and dont need to have. Again its just my opinion based on the people I know, have spoken to and have read about...You are free to disagree with me but can you prove that gay men dont compromise the integrity or effectiveness of a combat unit? Do you personally serve in a unit with any women or openly gay men? Do you know of any units with openly gay men within? You may be in the army but you have as much experience with openly gay soldiers as I do..ie zero.
Ok follow my line of thought here...Gays cause division in society as a whole..Thats not of their own action but because of peoples attitudes toward them. You only need to turn on the TV to see evidence of this. Soldiers are just the same as normal people with regard to their attitude. Therefore its safe to say that the attitudes of soldiers toward gay men is the same as that of civilians toward gay men.
In case you missed it, you entered this thread with an attack on me personally..You didnt listen to my opinions, you ridiculed me, my lifestyle and my abilities..Anything I said was in reply to you.
How is saying theres no place for gays and women in the military a commentary on the rights and wrongs of homosexuality?
Again, please tell me how saying gays cause division is in any way homophobic or insulting? Ah you call me homophobic because I simply state that homosexuals cause division..interesting but completely false..
I ask you again, please show me where I have been in any way insulting, derogatory or pass judgement toward homosexual men.
If I say a man doesnt have a place in a womens 100m race does that men I have an irrational hatred of men?
<IMG alt="image" SRC="http://www.intriguing.com/mp/_pictures/compdiff/campingI.jpg">
What a FEARSOME fighting force THAT must be...
By the same token then, blacks cause racism. Or, how about the Jews caused the holocuast.
Not by their own actions but because of peoples attitudes...
Do you realise how stupid you sound? All of your arguments about how gays disrupt an army are the same arguments that were put forward by forces against blacks in mixed regiments. And how has that turned out? Do they CAUSE disruption? Or are they an effective element of EVERY army?
As for the previous comments (not by Balddog I must say) about women in the army and being 'on the rag' and their general capabilities I have two comments.
1 - In the sixties scientists developed something which is now referred to as 'the pill'. This affects the female menstrual cycle and can prevent them having a period. This may not have made it out to whatever hick county in the US that you came from thanatos, but it'll be there soon enough.
2 - Ever heard of the Russian Army in the 40s? Ever seen what they achieved? Believe it or not but there were women in the forces that captured Berlin. In fact the Germans were more afraid of them than the male because they were far more aggressive (don't dare mention PMT!).
Just an observation.
Maybe my choice of the word 'cause' was a bad one..You cannot deny that there is division surrounding gays...If there werent then why are they banned from serving in the first place....
You say my arguments are rubbish but I dont see anyone offering any counter argument...Surely the very fact that we are having this discussion proves that there is controvosy surrounding gays in the forces..Controvosy leads to division.
As for Blacks in mixed regiments...Yes division did occur back in the days when attitudes toward blacks were less than pleasant..Like it or not, gays are seen as different by most, strange by some and disgusting by a few...Im sure that in a few years when gays are more accepted by the country as a whole then they might be permitted into the army.
The ironic thing is that if you actually suggested that, you would probably be branded a horrific sexist.
As a point of fact, I havent given my personal view on homosexuals or blacks anywhere in these forums so it is rather rude of you guys to suggest I am a racist homophobe..I have done nothing more than state the effect I perceive gays would have on an army unit..
"An Englishman's never so natural as when he's holding his tongue." --Henry James
Division leads to division. How did the blacks become integrated and accepted into the army? By their exclusion or inclusion?
I agree that divisions exist, they always will. There are still racists in the military, as there are in society. But the Military SHOULD reflect the society it protects.
Gays are seen as different, but then we all are. It's what makes us individuals and you can not more exclude someone based on the fact they have blue eyes than you can because they are gay. You cannot change who you ARE, just your personality.
There comes a time when the brave step (taken by strong 'men') has to be taken. It was taken to allowed blacks in to the army, to allow promotion through the ranks, etc. This is just another step.
If you are excluding someone on their fighting ability then I have no problem but, by excluding the gays instantly, this is not even a consideration. The decision is based on sexuality not ability.
I have yet to read a single racist statement from you. I do not suggest you are racist and never have. I do believe that you may be homophobic, because you are judging a sector of society as a whole, and not the individual. You may, of course, just be playing devil's advocate, but it is a homophobic position to take.
I think blacks became integrated and accepted into the army because they eventually became integrated and accepted into British society as a whole. Now as organisations go, there aint many more conservative than the armed forces..I believe that the army does reflect the society it serves but maybe a few years behind, if you see what im saying.
I've heard all the stuff about our differences are what make us special and unique. The point is, theres not much place for indivuality in the army..They have to work as a cohesive unit of men.
I disagree with this..Say there was a gay man who came top of his class in everything, was the perfect soldier, in top physical shape etc..If his squadmates didnt completely trust or respect him then im afraid if it were up to me, hed be out..Its a cliche but the needs of the many outweighs the needs of the few in my book when it comes to the army.
Sorry, I took your referrals to my argument and blacks/jews as implying I was racist..
I havent actually judged gays at all. I made a judgement of the reaction of straight soldiers..If anything I generalised about straight male soldiers..I think the word homophobic is thrown around far too often..Even if I did say all gays are raging queens, thats not homophobic, just an unfounded generalisation..I dont think I have ever met an OED definition of a homophobe in my entire life.
You'll have to take my word for it but I can assure you I have no problem whatsoever with gays.
I thought that it was the indivuality of the team members that made it a team. It certainly is in any other walk of life, it is the skills that each person brings that makes it function. Look at a tank regiment - they aren't all drivers...
Fair point, perhaps your choice of language has let you down there then.
Whether you support the views of these soldiers or not, you actually promote homophobia by making it acceptable. If you do not agree with their view, you should say so. "The man who says nothing, has no voice at all..."
While I dont have a problem with gays myself, I also dont have a problem with people that dislike them..Everyone has a right to think whatever they like...Who am I to tell them what they think is wrong. I'll gladly dispute someones facts but I dont feel right passing condemnation on someones personal opinion...Unless of course its directed at me and them ill kick em in the nuts.
"An Englishman's never so natural as when he's holding his tongue." --Henry James
lmfao I had on my badd-ass mother fucker arse on, as u probably noticed lmfao <IMG alt="image" SRC="http://www.thesite.org/ubb/biggrin.gif">
Firstly to call me inexperienced can be both true and false depending what u were refering to. If u r talking about me being inexperienced about the army, or combat or anything to do with that sort of thing....then u r not wrong. I have no first hand experience with anything like that, this is obviouse though as I am a woman and would be eliminated lol! While Its still in my head I just want to point out that a woman can prevent having a period by taking the pill and if thats the only thing making her unfit for combat then they should be practically fit for combat if they r on the pill I assume? Not meaning to get side-tracked, regarding my so called inexperience... if u had infact meant I am inexperienced in life, and basically dont have a clue or anything or that nature then all I can say is u couldnt be more worng. Im now going to compliment myself for a change and say just how much experience I really do have in life...and unfortunatly this is a result of things Ive been through, people Ive met and situations Ive found myself etc etc that have not been what u would consider nice or fun or anything other than shit that shouldnt have to be experienced by anybody at all. I feel no need to tell u anything about just how much expereince I have in life for theres no need to proove myself to u when I honestly couldnt give a flying fuck what u think of me...your oppinion of how I am means nothing to me and isnt even nearly correct anyway so there u go <IMG alt="image" SRC="http://www.thesite.org/ubb/smile.gif">
One more thing I feel I must get out even though Im sure the people that need to hear it will do the opposite because they cannot accept anything new or different from the things they already no...sad that u r so frightened of change really coz life will involve a lot of that and u r sure to struggle when u r so scared of it! Anyway, the thing I want to finnish with it HOW VERY VERY INEXPERIENCED AND CHILDISH YOU MUST BE TO EVEN BEGIN TO COMPARE PEDOHILLIA BEHAVIOUR WITH HOMOSEXUAL BEHAVIOUR...THEY ARE NOT NOW AND NEVER WILL BE ANYTHING EVEN REMOTELY SIMILAR. IT IS SICK AND DISTURBING THAT SOMEONE REALLY SEE'S IT THAT WAY HOWEVER ITS NOT SUPRISING AND ONLY WHAT I EXPECTED TO HEAR FROM YOU ANYWAY!
And with that Im now signing off from this as I have nothing more to say and nothing more that is even worth anything can possibly come from such a foul human being like you...cheerio!
Thank you Karla, thats the point I tried to make regarding respect and insults etc. Just so you know I am no more insulted by some comment about getting 'done' up the arse than I would be if someone were to buy me a bunch of flowers...in other words it only made me happy to watch how a grown man can even want to try and insult someone that much younger in age, prooving just how low people can go <IMG alt="image" SRC="http://www.thesite.org/ubb/smile.gif">
Point number one women: Women have a higher pain threshold than most men, cos of the pain of childbirth- dont forget that. Women are also quite often more vicious fighters, something which is good in one-to-one combat. And that isnt just me saying that, a well-respected ex-american general said as much on The James Whale Show a while back- he reckoned taht the maternal instincts in combat made women better fighters, if, obviously, not quite as physically strong (but a fit woman will be stronger than 90% of the male population).
Point number two homosexuals:
So, every gay person is a raging butt-muncher who will shag any bloke within a five mile radius, right? Better not drop the soap, or else hell be right up your ass before you can say 'oops'. And as for being physically and mentally strong, he wont be, hell be far more worried about eyeing up all the soldiers than doing his job and saving his own life.
Anyone who thinks this, and genuinely believes it, has a lower IQ than the average dog turd. Gays are NO different to straights, except that they happen to find men (or women!) attractive, as opposed to members of the opposite sex. It isnt perverted, sick, or unnatural, and a gay man doesnt CHOOSE to be gay - he just is. Yes, its more uncommon that heterosexuality, but what difference does sexual orientation make to a person? Its no different to preferring blondes to brunettes, girls with big boobs to those without.
Grow up and deal with it. "Raving queens" aint gonna come up and butt-rape all the men, in exactly the same way a straight man wouldnt grab a girl off the street and rape her in an alleyway. And, strangely enough, they arent all like Brian from Big Brother, in the same way not all straight blokes like beer, blondes with big tits, and shagging the blondes with big tits.
That people can still think this in the 21st century sickens me. And, to be honest, people spreading such homophobic, disgusting filth are not welcome at TheSite, or on this BB. Im a straight guy, by the way.
It matters not who won or lost, but how you place the blame.
First, homosexualism is nothing new: it goes back at least as far
as the ancient Greeks. It cannot be described as unnatural, since humans are products of the natural world; it probably has both genetic and societal components. It is also a mistake to think of
homosexuality as being 'opposite' to heterosexuality. It's better
to consider sexuality as having two components: 'homo' and
'hetero'. Low on both and you've got, what, a 'hermit,' not
particularly interested in sex either way. High on both and
you've got an out-and-out bisexual. The other two extremes (high
on one and low on the other) are the traditional 'queer' and
'straight' types we've come to know and love (and hate). The
distribution may be skewed towards one corner, but there are
people all over this 'sexual square.'
Second, it is utterly true that the military is not to be seen as
a part of civvie street. The soldiers are the ones that must
fight the war, and for this reason they are always the most
hateful of war. It is also becuase of this that they must leave a
good deal (though not all) of their 'humanity' / 'civilization' /
'decency' / 'tolerance' behind. Once the conflict gets going,
they have to knuckle down and do the job. Operational
effectiveness (i.e. getting the war over with as quickly as
possible with minimum destruction) is the key.
Now, it seems to me that Squaddie Sample (straight or gay, male
or female) faces two challenges: (1) being physically and
mentally up to the task in and of hirself, (2) being able to
function as part of the unit (squad, company, whatever). Now, if
Squaddie Sample can't do the X miles in full kit, or has problems
shooting straight, s/he won't even reach a combat unit, so the
question is moot.
What remains, then, is how well Squaddie Sample can fit into hir
squad / comapny &c. Whatever we may think of it, the fact is that
the present-day prejudice against homosexuals would preclude
Squaddie Sample being an effective part of an effective unit. In
time, these prejudices may die of their own accord. If so,
Squaddie Sample can look forward to taking hir place in the ranks
and on the front line.
The question, though, is whether these prejudices should be
deliberately challenged. Should we simply force 'integration'
(for want of a better word) on the Forces? When the US military
was de-segregated in the years following WWII there were grumbles
of various volumes, but things seem to have turned out all right.
Who's to say the same trick wouldn't work now?
Well, my opinion is this: take it slowly. The military is, by its
nature, an arch-conservative organisation. It is now coming to
terms with the presence of homosexuals in society at large and in
its own ranks, much as with blacks, I think. Given time,
acceptance and tolerance will probably grow to the point that the
final leap of declaring the ranks open can be made without great
difficulty. The individual calibre of Squaddie Sample won't have
changed (fitness standards being much the same as they always
were), and the other main obstacle (team integration) will have
ceased to be.
P.S. I would count the whole 'bloodhounds track menstruating
female squaddie' problem as an individual problem (i.e. a failure
of Squaddie Sample to meet operational requirements), not one of
acceptance and integration. I suspect that advances in technology
will soon make almost all humans trackable by scent / pheremones
&c. in the near future anyway, rendering the point moot.
P.P.S. thanatos, that picture you posted looks like the old British Army joke drill manoeuvre of "Change Sex on the March." Had there been any women in the squad, they'd have started off marching like than and you have changed to 'normal' marching as the men changed to that 'queer' style. It's a JOKE.
Well said MacKenzie !!
Yes, we're not civillians, and yes we don't hate war - some of us see war as the last resort, but it's our job and we signed up for the whole spectrum .. we expect it.
As you say, when you ARE in a frontline unit there is no place for homophobics, sexists, bigots or anyone .. you DO have to knuckle down and you can't detest anyone for what they believe in, whether it's sexuality, gender or even religion, because we have to be a solid cohesive unit. Any weakness caused by peoples attitudes to the things above leads me to believe that they're insecure and/or immature in some way to deal with it .. and just get on with it.
As i said in a previous post if a gay person found a 'straight' soldier unconcious and had to give CPR then he wouldn't say 'oh thats the gay hater - i'll let him die.' prejudices like that cost lives, and lower moral, which in turn also costs lives, and the less soldiers with the 'dinosaur attitudes' of Thanatos the better.
Pre-conceived attitudes are just a handicap, both in military and civvy life, and it's upto those people to educate themselves and show some tolerance to people with different beliefs, morals and sexuality.
Again, well said MacKenZie.
Gender, sexual orientation and other prejudices are non-existent when determining an individuals fitness, capabilities or weaknesses. Female targets albeit are lower than the Male targets, as is BFT and such like .. but after that there's no seperate standards for men or women, especially in battle .. both perfrom their duties side by side, and therefore have the SAME standards.
The majority of soldiers, and civillians, i know are not homophobic woman haters .. that IS a minority, and thankfully a rapidly vanishing minority. I'm not saying that it doesn't exist in the Army as it does in society as a whole, but that it's a rapidly diminishing 'trend' leaving the hompohpobic sexists all alone to start their one-man campaign against people they, and they alone detest.
Thankfully the 'caveman attitude' of senior officers in The Army has changed. Mainly because they've reached the end of their service, been posted elsewhere or have just adapted to the differing trends of society, in my opinion, are the main reasons.
Sexuality, Gender and whatever else dicriminates people is a trend, just the same way as fashion and music are trends.
People dislike some fashions and musical tastes, so no matter WHAT aspect of society you look at there will always be critics.
I suggest those people take a look at their own self before even attempting to criticise others, while persuading others to conform to cetain standards. <IMG alt="image" SRC="http://www.thesite.org/ubb/smile.gif">
Visit Alzaweb <IMG alt="image" SRC="http://www.stopstart.fsnet.co.uk/smilie/guitarist.gif">
[This message has been edited by Powerslave (edited 18-08-2001).]
OK I'll let you in on a little secret, 3 of the 4 US military services train men and women together (Army, Navy, Air Force). The Marines on the other hand train them seperatly and try as best as possable to keep the training equal. Many studies have found that not only does seperate training improve abilities of both men and women, women can by no means keep up. Women get a extra 5 minutes to run 3 miles cause they can't run as fast. There are a few exeptions, but they aren't as fast as the fastest males, just faster than the slowest males.
"Women are also quite often more vicious fighters, something which is good in one-to-one combat......but a fit woman will be stronger than 90% of the male population"
Well Women do tend to not fight fair, but one point I really need to make again. Women can't handle taking a 100 lb pack and going on a 20 mile forced hike at about 4 mph on average. This is up hills that slope up to 60 degrees in incline. Women just can't do it. So when we go on this adventure hike and we drop our packs as we are loading our weapons and start fighting and doing fireteam rushes for 400+ meters (3 seconds burst sprints followed by jumping back to the deck) and actually engage the enemy in close combat, there wont be any females left to fight. And any homosexual that doesn't have the ability to keep it his little secret, wont be able to handle the task either.
BTW men when we are done with this operation, if we are still alive we'll be getting our packs and going back to the rear so be ready for 20 more miles the chow isn't coming to us.
If you know any females or openly gay males that are up to this task and can prove it, I'll actually consider retracting some of my statements.
Probably a cook in the BAF reserves <IMG alt="image" SRC="http://www.thesite.org/ubb/biggrin.gif">
Out of my mind. Back in five minutes.
As for the women thing yet again even those who could manage to do this would still be on the rag once a month and the bloodhounds would be after them
OK, and why should homosexuals keep it 'their little secret' if homosexuality is accepted in the Armed Forces. It's accepted in the UK, but judging by your caveman attitude it's not accepted in the US. Your problem not ours.
FYI Thanatos, i serve in 42 Commando Regt. Royal Marines, and part of this regiments task is rapid deployment to worldwide hotspots, and NATO peacekeeping duties.
I'd guess that we follow roughly the same training , yomps and whatever else, but thats where the similarities end.
Our attitude is totally different, and it's accepted worldwide that Royal Marines are renowned for their professionalism, skill and fitness and that my friend is all down to attitude, maturity and discipline .. USA isn't good at all things and it's time you lot 'wake up and smell the coffee' <IMG alt="image" SRC="http://www.thesite.org/ubb/biggrin.gif">
I've served for the past 10 years .. and i'm not a cook as you said. Instead i'll just pretend, for once, that your dull and tedious USA 'humour' is funny and laugh intelligently. <IMG alt="image" SRC="http://www.thesite.org/ubb/biggrin.gif">
Any wisecracks now smart arse ???????
Visit Alzaweb <IMG alt="image" SRC="http://www.stopstart.fsnet.co.uk/smilie/guitarist.gif">
Obviously 'the pill' still hasn't made it to North Carolina yet.
It's funny, but now thanatos and thanatos-jr (lots of imagination there guys) are on the board, I'm starting to understand why the Yanks want guns <IMG alt="image" SRC="http://www.thesite.org/ubb/biggrin.gif">
[This message has been edited by Slug (edited 18-08-2001).]
If you can actually say that you have never had a problem with females keeping up with the rest of your unit then either you aren't really in the Royal Marines (or a blanket stacker like slug said) or you are feeding your women something that we need to get a hold of here in the US.
As for the 'open' homosexuals they tend to be a little bit on the frail side when It comes to mental stress. Besides the fact that many of us barbarians have a problem with 'men' painting there nails and saying girlfriend. As stated several times before, if they shut up and don't say a word than they are 'closet' homosexuals and we don't have a problem cause we don't know. There is a difference here. As I said if all the Joint Chiefs of staff were 'closet' homosexuals then I wouldn't have a problem because it wouldn't affect there ablility to lead there troops. There are actually a lot of people who even if not openly, have a problem with males that stick their penis into other men's asses. And just for the record, it is against the Uniform Code of Military Justice to have anal sex with females or basicly anything but good old fashion sex. This is not a new rule but as been around since 1775 (for the US) I'm sure your country at least used to have a similar rule.
Well we're all bootnecks aren't we?
All trained the 'kin same level as the next person, albeit better trained than the Army, but some have trades.
I'm a qualified Telecomms Tech. and FYI that's not a band boy or a blanket stacker .. so i'd think you should re-evaluate your subtle attempt at slander 'Slug' .. what's you usual nick then?? <IMG alt="image" SRC="http://www.thesite.org/ubb/smile.gif">
Visit Alzaweb <IMG alt="image" SRC="http://www.stopstart.fsnet.co.uk/smilie/guitarist.gif">
Yes, many years ago i used to dislike gays, or suspected gays as they were known .. but now the MoD has quashed the gender side of it, then gays and females can serve providing they meet the basic standards that you or i have met.
To my knowledge there's not been a single Female that has passed The Commando Course, Green Beret,- at the CTC .. that's not sexist, that's fact .. they don't bend the rules for females becuase we all have to meet the same standards because you can't have ANY person lagging behind when you need them .. or unable to provide a forward assault, or CTR because of their lack of fitness.
I have worked with females on joint excercises with the British Army and i've nothing to say because they excelled at nearly everything and outpaced some of us on a number of occasions.
Myself and many others have educated oursleves about gays, becuase what it boils down to is the fact that if we detest them then they're gonna be around longer than us .. so you just have to eat humble pie and accept the changing policies of the Mod, or US Army.
If they don't perform as part of a unit then they'll be kicked out, just as anyone can be. They can shout 'discrimination' all they want but an essential part of any unit is to bond quickly, keep close to the group when tabbing for miles, and to support the group in any situation whether its a pissy training excercise or a frontline full-on war.
The MoD still remain VERY sceptical about women in frontline roles, and up until a few years ago there wasn't a female fighter pilot.
We all have doubts and criticisms about females in battle, but you just have to bite the bullet and get on with it, because some women are more manly than some blokes and you wouldnt diss a bloke for being a bit less masculine .. that doesnt mean to say that all female soldiers are raving lesbians with #1 cuts .. just an observation <IMG alt="image" SRC="http://www.thesite.org/ubb/smile.gif">
I have my opinion, and just because it differs from yours doesnt mean i'm a blanket stacker does it .. maybe i'm just a realist?
Visit Alzaweb <IMG alt="image" SRC="http://www.stopstart.fsnet.co.uk/smilie/guitarist.gif">
[This message has been edited by Powerslave (edited 19-08-2001).]
youve got these ideas of stereotypes into your head... do you also think that all lesbians are butch and wear dungarees and have short hair? if you do, then your ideas of gay people need radically changing, as they just arent right.
how many more times does MOK have to explain that a woman who is on the pill has the ability to prevent having a period at all? so there will be NO wild dogs chasing them when they're on their period, so that argument has been quite successfully quashed. shame you dont seem to have realised that yet.
Out of my mind. Back in five minutes.
OK now if we are talking about 'normal' men who just like to take it up the ass, then as long as they don't share that info with me HOW THE FLYING FUCK WOULD I KNOW THAT THEY ARE A DICKSUCKING PRINCESS!!!!!
I appologies for the outburst but you don't seem to understand our 'don't ask, don't tell' policy. If someone doesn't reveal that they are a homosexual, then they have enough composure to be in the military as long as they pass all physical requirements. It is those that wave it in everyones faces that is so discusting and breaks down unit effectiveness. I'm sure knowone wants to hear about my sexual exploits, so why do we want to know that they are gay?
BTW, Telecomms Tech, is that an actual technician or is it something more off the wall. Just wondering, our Sigint Com specialists work in Radio Battalions so you never know what someone really does by a job title.
I'm a Sigint EW Specialist. I analyst radar signals and brief the pilots on threats and inform them on there targets ect. I also build the jamming programs that we use in our prowler aircraft. Do you work with land, air or sea units.