Americans Support Gays, Oppose Homosexuals In The Military

As the government weighs the repealing of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” wonder where the American public stands? Wonkette reports that the latest polls show that a majority of Americans support “gay men and lesbians” serving openly in the military, but less than half support “homosexuals” doing so. There you have it, a wise and decisive answer.

, ,

  • nick__nick

    hahahahahhaha

  • http://www.xenex.org/ xen

    They then asked their opinions on “pillow biting faggots” and “rug munching dykes”. Most were in favor of the dykes on the battlefield (they are tougher, according to the polls) but felt the faggots should stick to nursing, giving buzzcuts, and designing uniforms for the soldiers. Almost all agreed that “human beings who will already exist for only a short time in the history of this planet and whose sexual preferences have no bearing on their ability to do a job” should be kept out of the military at all costs. Too liberal.

  • tonyviner

    Americans. Gotta love 'em.

  • http://profiles.yahoo.com/u/PDDVWRQVUPMKRGHURIEQVNYWHQ Sean

    there are valid arguments against, none of which hinge on the ability of the individuals to be soldiers, but are based the ability of the majority to get past stereotypes and do their jobs(oh such a professional army we have)
    but this could all be solved if people grew the f*** up a little

  • tonyviner

    I don't know, I have a feeling that if I were gay all of those BIG, LONG, HARD rockets and missiles EXPLODING in the faces of our enemies might just get my mouth watering and distract me from my job of depriving other people of their land and resources in the name of freedom. Do people still believe that? Do people still believe that we are actually looking out for the interests of SOMEONE ELSE??

  • Blah

    Has anyone noticed that the percentages don't make any sense?

    • Mok

      What are you having trouble understanding about it?

      When asked:

      Do you favor or oppose “Homosexuals” being allowed to serve openly?

      The results were:
      Favor: 44%
      Oppose: 42%
      [ undecided 14%]

      Then they changed the terminology…

      Do you favor or oppose “Gay Men & Lesbians” being allowed to serve openly?

      The results were:
      Favor: 58%
      Oppose: 28%
      [ undecided 14%]

      It appears that the 14% which was undecided about the subject were the only ones that knew that both questions were the same.

      It is sorta like asking which one you like better, NASCAR or Stock Car Racing?

  • 5by5

    Ask them if they would favor “homosexuals” serving in the military, and the result is 44%.

    Ask them if they would favor “gay men and lesbians” serving in the military, and the result is a 58% approval rating.

    See, the second question reminds them that these are PEOPLE we're talking about, not some abstract concept like “homosexual” which they don't fully understand, and which just represents an activity.

    A 14% difference simply by pointing out these are your fellow HUMANS you might be discriminating against.

    Also fascinating is the “oppose” part of the equation, where the difference is even MORE pronounced.

    Ask them if they would oppose “homosexuals” serving in the military, and the result is 42%.

    Ask them if they would oppose “gay men and lesbians” serving in the military, and the result plummets to a mere 28%.

    This is more pronounced because it is more aggressive. In this case, it calls for you to actively “oppose” another human being with your irrational prejudice. This is much harder to do, as the rather comforting truth is, MOST people actually have difficulty hurting another human being.

    The real irony here is that the one place that's really good at teaching you to objectify another human being, and reduce them to nothing but a thing you can eliminate “with extreme prejudice”?

    The military.

    In the Civil War, some estimates say that as many as half the men, wouldn't actually fire their weapons at other people. By WWI and WWII, they were more motivated to pull the trigger, but many intentionally missed, still having difficulty with the killing. That number was reduced in Korea as both Madison Avenue and Psychiatry began to figure out how to manipulate people more successfully, but it really fell during Vietnam, when the military began to use techniques that literally broke down a soldier's personality during basic training through harassment, depersonalization, and other psychological techniques to objectify “the enemy”, and then rebuilt it from scratch in their image.

    Now, with all the remote killing we do, “the enemy” is reduce to a blip on a video game, and “collateral” damage is glossed over with assertions of “precision” weaponry that's never quite as precise as advertised, but allows men and women to use them to pretend they aren't responsible for any civilian deaths that result from their pulling the trigger.

    The truth is, people are at their core, much better than we think. They have to have that switch in their head that says “don't kill another person” turned off by others in order to go into battle and actually kill.

    The problem the military has is, they're very good at turning that switch off, but spend next to zero time turning it back on again when a servicemember leaves the military. Thus, the explosion of PTSD. They pressurize these folks, and then never depressurize them.

    They're also not very good at differentiating that the female soldier next to you is not an object you can rape, and neither is the gay soldier next to you just a concept that you can gang up on in some idiotic misguided attempt to prove your strength, because the military does a shit job of insisting on professionalism, and universal esprit de corps that proactively supports those segments of the service.

    This is largely because the “leadership” at the Pentagon itself still has a lot of growing up to do in terms of abolishing outmoded ideas that simply aren't relevant, and which ironically are hurting readiness, because it's costing them highly skilled personnel they desperately need.

    • rfw888

      Very well spoken.

  • rfw888

    most of my opinions fall into the “conservative” category, but this is one of those exceptions. As a veteran I can speak from experience, there are many in the service who are gay and it makes no difference to their co-workers, as long as normal, civilized behaviour is displayed. When the times are exciting, and the lead is flying, no-one but an idiot cares about sexual orientation. In the barracks, still no-one cares as long as the gay individual keeps his/her hands to themselves. Any kind of harassment is already dealt with under existing regulations.I don't think Alexander the Great had a big problem with homosexuals in his world-conquering army. This is just another example of Xians trying to push their religiously-motivated bigotry onto the rest of us. when, oh when will we have freedom FROM religion?

    • James_Smith

      Very good comment and completely accurate.

      When will we have freedom from religion? Perhaps after the current WW III eliminates all the christians, muslims, and other Xian idiots.

  • Polymorpheous

    the culture in the american military is FAR different than in civilian life.

    in a perfect world gays, straights, muslims, taoists, etc should be able to serve openly.

    do we live in a perfect world? telling an idealistic 18 year old homosexual boy, who just enlisted in the marines, that it is ok to be out and proud in the military is just an invitation for harassment. or worse.
    and the military would probably not do a thing about it.

    look into what happened at ft. hood, tx.

    sorry if any of this doesn't sit well with any of you. but anyone with any amount of military experience in the united states will tell you it's a completely different culture.

    let's not invite tragedy to make some feel-gooders in washington feel good. the culture needs to change 1st.

  • James_Smith

    To quote H.L. Mencken, “No one ever lost an election underestimating the intelligence of the American voter.” It's even more true today then it was then. The “Dumbing down of America” is proceeding at an awesome pace.

  • Anonymous

    Very good comment and completely accurate.

    When will we have freedom from religion? Perhaps after the current WW III eliminates all the christians, muslims, and other Xian idiots.

  • Ashley

    what is wrong with people these days? love is love why does it matter what sex you are and who your in love with? people are people…this is just as bad as all the racial issues that are going on today and that have been going on for years, ALL ARE EQUAL!!! if you think your better than homosexuals, bisexuals etc. than you’ve got some major problems and need to get over yourself!

  • Ashley

    what is wrong with people these days? love is love why does it matter what sex you are and who your in love with? people are people…this is just as bad as all the racial issues that are going on today and that have been going on for years, ALL ARE EQUAL!!! if you think your better than homosexuals, bisexuals etc. than you’ve got some major problems and need to get over yourself!

21