Doonesbury by Garry Trudeau for December 17, 2010

I like Mel’s optimism. That’s all she needs, some R&R.

Jackie reminds me of Rumsfeld’s “unknown, unknown” speech, now I know what he was talking about.

…it’s incredibly idiot. Good brave soldiers are sent home ‘cause are gay, and rapists of kids (but HETERO!!) are kept in service until some clip on YouTube shames them to the world. Western civilisation, indeed.

Agreed. Just because someone is homosexual does not mean they can’t be a fantastic solider, or nurse, or physician, or… well just about anything. There are more “perverts” who are straight than homosexual, and that is on a percentage basis. Gender, and sexual interests should not come into play in any job!

I remember when the Danish king rode out with the yellow star of David that the Nazis required all Jews to wear. If everyone in the military comes out, surely they won’t all be fired.

(and don’t call me Surely)

there he is folks , exposed to the world. plus4 is one of those sadly ignorant people who are convinced that all gay people are made that way by circumstance or choice…..yes, choice…..

the “myth” of sexual orientation— un freaking believable!

FriscoLou, If Rummy EVER starts to make sense to you, it’s time to go have a little lie-down…

nighthawks, sexual orientation causality is not yet a hard science. Just a few years ago, the medical field considered it a curable defect, so let’s not call someone who disagrees with your own personal interpretation as “sadly ignorant”. We’re all ignorant until the facts are in, and most of them are not in yet, political posturing on both sides of the isle withstanding.

I find it interesting that the gay community flies a colorful rainbow flag as its symbol and yet so many people within it only think of sexuality from a simplistic black and white perspective - straight or gay. From the research I’ve seen, many sexual preferences overlap, including being straight, gay, dominant, submissive, and/or fetish-driven (dozens of types). Some of these preferences may have natural genetic predispositions, others are a psychological reaction to circumstances, and others may be consciously learned. Because they overlap, none of them exclude any others.

My personal belief is that most sexuality - including forms of which that are illegal - is the result of recessive genetic traits that nature activates now and then to keep us adaptive to our changing world. Other species have similar physical mechanisms, but humans are creatures of the mind and that is where our adaptability resides.

Just my theory, but one I’ve studied for a long while. No need to get excited and call me “ignorant”.

Nemesys

I thought that the rainbow was an emblem of the GLBT (Gay Lesbian Bisexual Transgendered) community.

These folks certainly are aware of and in very strong support of recognizing a wide range of gender identification.

Some Gay groups have had a history of narrowly drawn gender distinctions. However the more folks become accurately informed about the wide range of orientations you mention the more likely they will become supportive of each other.

BTW, is it just me or does seem to others that nighthawks would not disagree with your perspective?

Sex is a biological imperative. In order for species to persist, they must by definition reproduce to ensure the continuation of their species. Without reproduction the species ceases to exist.

So how are homosexuals reproducing? Is there a recessive gene, like blue eyes, that pops up a certain percentage of the time?

I have no problem with homosexuals in the military as long as they do their job. I am tired of the politically correct glorification of homosexuality and its practicioners as a victimized segment of society that deserves special accommodations.

sorry plus4 but after working face to face with the glbt community for 10 years i have yet to meet a lesbian who has been abused, let me guess you got your statistics off the internet? Wikipedia even?

Nemesys, I think most of the gay community gets that sexuality in not a “straight or gay” situation much better than heterosexuals do. I believe that’s because they have more exposure to people in the whole GLBT spectrum, which has pulled together in the years since Stonewall (1969) to provide each other a degree of security and political strength – especially in the last 20 or so years.

I do think that a lot of people are stuck in a different sort of either/or mentality; that of nature or nurture. To suggest that our sexual orientation could be even partially influenced by our history will get your head handed to you in a lot of circles. I happen to believe that our experiences help shape what was already given us by nature.

sandfan writes:

Sex is a biological imperative. In order for species to persist, they must by definition reproduce to ensure the continuation of their species. Without reproduction the species ceases to exist.

But of course there is only a need for some members of the species to reproduce. There are many examples where specific members of a species do not reproduce, but may be necessary to the survival of their species in other ways. (See, for example, the biological literature on the roots of altruism.)

So how are homosexuals reproducing? Is there a recessive gene, like blue eyes, that pops up a certain percentage of the time?

That is one of the biological conjectures, yes. The other primary one is that everyone has biological options of being sexually attracted in either way, and that some type of “switch” at an early stage decides which biological aspect is switched on at what point. That hypothesis doesn’t seem to me to be particularly consistent with the twin studies that showed the biological roots of homosexuality in the first place, but it is still an option. (It might also account for the some of the wide variety of the spectrum of sexuality identites.)

There may be hope! As of today a few Republican Senators have stated their support of a separate bill to repeal DADT.

As to the Gandhi quote, I think civilization in general would be a good idea.

Please don’t take the above sentence too seriously. Civilization is, though quite a mixed bag.

@jgcp1 Personally, I prefer rummy, the card game.

I know lesbians who say their lesbianism is a political choice, part of their feminist rejection of male domination, which is inevitable in intimate male-female relationships. I can understand that feeling, even though it doesn’t seem to be an option for me.

I was a straight female in the Navy in 1973.

I was nearly raped twice and fought them off. Yet, this is not addressed at all.

If it hadn’t been for one of my fellow WAVES (who BTW was gay) coming to my rescue, I fear I would’ve been in much worse shape.

Oh, and the sailor who accosted me? The Chaplin spoke to him and the whole thing was dropped.

Privacyinvasion,

Are you kidding me? Your comment causes me to suspect that you don’t actually know any feminists or lesbians. The idea that any intimate hetero relationship demands submission on the part of the female is absurd, and probably only a reflection of your own relationships.

Ummm… Reality check for sandfan et al: Homosexuality and reproduction are not mutually exclusive. The first is an orientation, the second is a statement of biological capacity. Lots of mostly-gay men and women have produced (and successfully raised) perfectly normal kids. Also strongly agree with chavey that not all members of a species need to reproduce… in fact, given our overpopulation, we could do with a lot fewer reproducing couples for the next few centuries!

I agree with most of the “Don’t ask, don’t tell”. If you are bragging about being “Gay” or “straight” then you are out for one thing, special treatment. I don’t care what you do behind closed doors as long as all parties agree. I do mind that people want special treatment because of this or that.

I do agree that people should be treated equal.

I also believe that marriage should be the domain of the church and not the state. If two people (or more) want to be “Married” and their church won’t support it, then maybe they are in the wrong religion. There is nothing stopping people from creating a new religion.

testing…..

testing…..

jgpc1 hasn’t gotten past “known, unknowns”

Gotta love it, some of these post are like life imitating art. I was reminded of this news report about the Carmichael v Connecticut case, the ONN has more credibility than FOX. I know it’s only satire, but there’s a shade of …, you decide.

@ImaginaryFriend The policy is NOT don’t brag, it’s don’t tell.

Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, and Transgendered folks are NOT asking for SPECIAL treatment, they are asking for relatively FAIR treatment.

DADT forces dishonesty and is more or less crazy making, or at least is a HUGE stressor.

As the best shrinks (and many of the rest of us) say, DENIAL aint no river in Africa.

Oh, jmerm–we can all be grateful to you for coming out of the closet with your bigotry! It throws light on what so many of the others are saying.

“Obsessed with her sexuality”????? Let me see–she has lost her job, all her previous training won’t be useful in the peacetime world, and it’s because her significant other betrayed her? BECAUSE of her sexuality.

Try having those exact things happen to you, for those very reasons, and see what you want to talk about on the flight home.

There’s a thread here that insists that GLBT people want to jam their lives down everyone else’s throat or are demanding special treatment. Just for a moment, put yourselves in their shoes.

They live in a society where about 90% of the people are different from them. The rules and the laws are made for the 90%. The 90% legally exclude GLBTs from hundreds of legal rights, including but not limited to:

being able to marry the person you want to spend your life with, and have or adopt children to form a family

We of the 90% take those rights for granted, and we trash them every chance we get. The high divorce rate and rates of child abuse, etc., are created by the 90% as they exercise their exclusive rights.

If you were in that 10%, wouldn’t you be angry? Grieving? Feeling betrayed and abandoned by the world you live in?

If you were in that 10%, wouldn’t you seek out the company of the people who understand you most of all–others in that 10%?

I am constantly staggered by the lack of empathy and, yes, humility on the part of the gay-haters who speak out in places like this. What world do you guys live in that you so casually trash other people?

ImaginaryFriend, nobody needs to create a new religion that will marry GLBT people. First off, marriages are covered by civil law, and when GLBT marriage becomes legal (which it will) anyone will be able to have a civil marriage. In addition, Unitarian Universalists and Quakers are dedicated to human rights, and will perform marriages for GLBTs. In several other denominations you can find liberal clergy who will do so, even if their denominations do not condone it.

wonder what the starving people would make of these luxury issues.

If this were happening in a civilian workplace the company would be sued for descrimination. Double standards for goverment positions? It seems so.

when a soldier gives his or her all in defense of a country they love does it really matter what their sexual orientation is? are they less or more dead? do they love their country less because of their sexual orientation? does their orientation mean their comrads in arms are more or less dear to them? and to address some of the most idiotic comments I have ever heard. their sexual orientation will not causethem to be having gay sex at inappropriate tines and places any more than heterosexualality. And homosexuality is not contagious, so your little boy or girl will not leave home a hetro and come home a flaming homosexual. and yes I an a staunch conservative and libertarian

alcoholism is supposedly a biologically-oriented predisposition but better for the individual and society if it is controlled. If we are unable to control our baser impulses then civilization is indeed doomed.

phdtogo, are you including homosexuality as one of “our baser impulses”? If so, that’s clearly your bias. If you mean “overreaction to homosexuality in others” as a “baser impulse”, I’d agree with you, but I think THAT’S purely cultural and not biological.

Come live in San Francisco for a while. Contrary to the stereotype, there are far more heterosexuals (including me) living here than homosexuals. But for the most part, nobody cares. For every one of the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence (men who dress as nightmare/sideshow nuns), there are a thousand Gay men who are simply as open about their homosexuality as other men are about their heterosexuality, no more and no less. They do their jobs (they might be plumbers, lawyers and carpenters, not just florists, hairdressers and nurses), have social lives (which include both Gay and straight friends), watch and play sports, and go home to the people they love and want to share their lives with. They’re “invisible” not because they’re hiding, but because in S.F. being open no longer means being conspicuous.

Equal Rights for GLBT isn’t about SPECIAL rights for ANYBODY. If they sometimes get “in your face” about it, it’s because they HAVE to; when the rest of the world stops hassling them about it, they’ll stop hassling you. They’re here, they’re (Gay), get used to it.

Tell em fritzoid, we’re not all as Stalinist, were you at the “40 and Fabulous” this year? I think I saw Yerbouti there.

“Two great sexes animate the world”—John Milton

How old-fashioned this sentiment must sound to those who have discovered that the world is a “rainbow” of sexes!

That benighted God of Genesis, who thought he was creating human beings of opposing genders (“male and female created he them”), would have been dazzled to learn that many who are not like Adam or Eve somehow contrive to become “one flesh”—or at least they pretend to partner physically, unimpeded by those invidious sexual distinctions.

We need a constitutional amendment making it politically incorrect to equate marriage with sex. With such a law in place, terms like man and wife, male and female, she and he, would gradually fall into disuse, and all marriages would be considered unisex.

plus4 said:

“(For example, see how many lesbians you can find who have not experienced sexual abuse at a young age.)”

Sir, as a retiree, and a “straight” (whatever the hell that really means) male, I have to challenge you on that statement. My ex-wife was never, in her admittance, ever sexually molested as a child (or in the 18 years I was married to her), and yet is now openly a lesbian.

The thoughts and tendencies were there late in our marriage, and, to an extent, acted upon, but were not the causation of our divorce.

Having served for my last 5 years in a hospital in Germany where there were many suspected, and some openly, admittedly GL personnel, I have to add, “so what?” I would be happy to serve with most of them today. Those I would not be happy to serve with would not be because of their sexual orientation.

diggitt said, “have or adopt children to form a family”

I have to disagree with this statement also. I do so by pointing out the nasty “divorce” going on right now with Melissa Etheridge(?) and her former partner, over child custody. As a lesbian, you can give birth to a child and, unless there are other legal issues (abuse, neglect) raise that child on your own or with a partner. I know of one Mom doing so in Tennessee, personally. As a gay, you can father a child, and then it would be up to the mother how much involvement would be allowed in the raising of that child. But, the same holds true for a divorced male, it is up to the mother to allow (despite what the law and a judge might say) her former husband’s involvement with the child.

AND

“First off, marriages are covered by civil law, and when GLBT marriage becomes legal (which it will) anyone will be able to have a civil marriage.”

It cannot be soon enough!

Final comments.

This is a damned comic strip folks, not reality. It is supposed to be entertaining and, in some cases, to make one think. GT is using Mel as an analogy of a situation that he sees happening in the Armed Services to make a point that he feels the situation is wrong. For all I know, GT may be anti GLBT, but he does not allow his bias to show through to his strip. Good for him!

Pointedly to those anti-GLBT people out there: The law is not written in stone and it can be changed. The law reflects society’s mores. When (not if) the majority of citizens object to the way and manner in which GLBT people are treated, the law will change. I am old enough to remember the Jim Crow laws, and the Civil Rights movement. Back in the 50’s, “niger” was not just an epitaph for an Afro-American, it was a way of life, albeit a very unfair one, for this country. GLBT rights are no different from the rights won by the Afro-American. It is only a matter of time before laws are enacted to protect their specific rights, so y’all best get used to it.

nighthawks said,

“there he is folks , exposed to the world. plus4 is one of those sadly ignorant people who are convinced that all gay people are made that way by circumstance or choice…..yes, choice…..

the “myth” of sexual orientation— un freaking believable!”

nighthawk, at least plus4 is willing to expose his views online and perhaps be willing to undergo a thought transformation because of the experience. I have been reading his posts for a couple of days now, and although I find some to be narrow minded and simplistic, I have noted that he has changed (a little) some of his stated views…just a little. I think he might be commenting in order to LEARN something. I would be more worried about the folks who read these comments and do not post because they are set in their ways, and “don’t want to be confused by the facts.”

Orgelspieler said,

“Ummm… Reality check for sandfan et al: Homosexuality and reproduction are not mutually exclusive. The first is an orientation, the second is a statement of biological capacity. Lots of mostly-gay men and women have produced (and successfully raised) perfectly normal kids.”

Seeing as this discussion is about gays in the military, there is a damned good example of the above statement in the Washington State National Guard. An Army Guard General (female) came out, or was outed, because she was a lesbian in the late 80’s early 90’s, and released from the Guard. To the “surprise” of many, she was formerly married and the mother of two or three grown children. The difference between “orientation” and “reproduction.”

Oh, this is such a relief. All that hysterical ranting yesterday, and now things have calmed down, just like a pot that was boiling too high and it “simmered down”. Lots of comments sound sane. You’re people I would be happy to know!

FriscoLou, I haven’t seen the parade in years. Not because I don’t like Gays, but because I don’t like crowds.

I got caught in the masses for the Giants last month, but that was unavoidable; the parade route ran right past the building where I work.

Ah, who can forget the WS parade, the biggest thing for SF since the founding of the United Nations and Nancy Pelosi becoming Speaker of the House (even tough she lost it the day before the parade).

I hear the bitterness, Fairportfan.

I though the Si-Fi fan died of misandry at a young age and went to “Davorkian Hell”.