After Hours

General discussion


Gays Serving in the U.S. Military - Who should decide?

By maxwell edison ·
Tags: Off Topic
Disclaimer: My personal position is two-fold:

One: A person's sexual preference and/or practice is his/her own business. I don't know whether sexual orientation is a matter of choice or birth, nor do I care. It's not my business what you do; it's not your business what I do.

Two: Serving in the military IS NOT a Constitutional right. The military can indeed discriminate for a variety of reasons (sorry, you have flat-foot), all of which are implemented for the purpose of maintaining the most effective military force possible. If you disagree, please show me the exact article of the Constitution that shows me to be wrong. The mission of the military is to be the most effective fighting force - no more, no less.

Having said that, whether or not gays are allowed to serve in the military is a question that I would pass on to the military experts; I'd yield to their opinion.

What's yours?

Edited to change the title and add the following content:;leftCol

This conversation is currently closed to new comments.

Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Comments

Collapse -

Can't help it, Nick

by santeewelding In reply to Adler

I, too, studied intensively Adler, along with Freud, Brenner, Brill, Jung, and the rest.

Came away thinking even before all what we think we know about genetics and epigenetics, "These guys don't have a clue!"

They go around in circles, along with Kant and his brethren.

Means you get to roll up your own sleeves -- assuming any of this matters -- and do it yourself.

I did. I do not appreciate anyone who fastens himself, for want of his own wits, to anything, this carlo guy included.

Collapse -

from the language used there are serious doubts...

by carlo.di.giorgio In reply to Can't help it, Nick

about qualifications needed to counter argue
Alfred Adler, who wrote his work on Homosexuality in a very difficult German, to my knowledge never translated into English. Are you a psychiatrist and psychologist with long years of medical practice? Can you read and understand German?
I am showing my real name while you hide behind fantasy and have no real serious arguments about the dynamic of the phenomenon. By just repeating the trendy ''pensee unique'' of the western liberals and homosexuals you can hardly dismantle the simple truth that humans are fallible creatures and prone to deviations of all sorts, from mild neuroses to psychotic perversions of appalling nature.
Good bye!

...that guy Carlo... as you put it very politely!

Collapse -


by santeewelding In reply to Can't help it, Nick

I see so many things going on in your post that I cannot even call you, "wrong".

You are, just, out there, indistinguishable from your subject.

Collapse -

that's the point because Adler dismissed genetic links...

by carlo.di.giorgio In reply to Adler

and based his conclusion that homosexuals were neurotics on direct observations of patients, knowing inside out the history and background of each of them. He concluded that Homosexuality is a neurotic vice acquired in the course of certain life circumstances, as humans learn to practice all sorts of defects and vices, hardened by continuous training to get deeper and deeper in oneself. You have numerous examples of this dynamic in almost all human activities: positive and negative alike. In certain cases the disorder can be cured with psychotherapy and methods such Autogenic Training by I.H. Schultz, though very often it's seated too deep. Adler says that it's like trying to make out of a coward a courageous man. This modern legend of covering human misbehavior by claiming GENETICS is to be outright dismissed. Alfred Adler was not so deficient when observing his patients very well known to him at times when the debate was alive. The actual word ''Homosexuality'' appeared for the first time in 1**4 on an American magazine: The Homosexual Problem. Fashion and social trends are nowadays the main learning source of this phenomenon, like drugs usage and all exotic and punky exibitionism since the 60's, mainly in Anglo-Saxon countries spread later all over the Western World via media and tourism. English Public Schools for Boys were famous for early learning of the perversion. Later in life many of those students 'converted' to normal behavior when they had become more proficient in approaching the by far more appealing opposite sex: Women.

NickNielsen I suggest you have a deep reading of Adler's work: Das Problem der Homosexualitaet and then you will see how genetics can be the answer. Cheers!

Collapse -

So now you're saying...

by NickNielsen In reply to that's the point because ...

NickNielsen I suggest you have a deep reading of Adler's work: Das Problem der Homosexualitaet and then you will see how genetics can be the answer.

Adler was wrong and genetics is a factor? Make up your mind.

Given the times, and the prevailing attitudes toward homosexuality, I'm not surprised his homosexual patients were neurotic. What I question is whether Adler's homosexual patients represent a valid sample of the homosexual population of the time. People who are comfortable with their lives and sexuality aren't very likely to consult a psychologist or psychoanalyst, so his patients do not represent an entire population. Basing any conclusions on his limited sample may have been good psychoanalysis, but it's lousy science.

Collapse -

Seeing as he died before DNA was discovered

by JamesRL In reply to that's the point because ...

I'm not sure its entirely relevent, as we have grown leaps and bounds in genetics since Adlers death in the mid thirties.

Collapse -

Are your tastes as mutable?

by DelbertPGH In reply to that's the point because ...

From what memoirs I have seen of gay men in magazines and movies, I see that many of them never are attracted to "the far more appealing opposite sex," as you put it. My nephew, for example, loves to be with girls, but only so he can talk about clothing and boys. When it comes to sex, he and girls are never in the same room. I don't think he will ever find happiness satisfying "normal" appetites. To his mind, what he does and wants is normal, and irresistable.

Apparently you think that he has chosen to be homosexual. He could change, you say; he perhaps just never wanted to develop mature tastes and find happiness chasing the superior female form. What he wants is a matter of choice, you say, not identity.

Well, if that's true, I imagine you are also prepared to want men sexually, to feel desire when looking at them and satisfaction when getting them. If you think there's no difference between my nephew and a straight man, then you'd agree there's no difference between my nephew and you, and that his willingness to engage in perversions could just as easily be yours. Or, maybe you think you're a little more complicated.

For my part, if I were looking down at some guy's bony butt, and up his hairy back, seeing his idiot face smiling over his shoulder at me, I could not find myself aroused. The thought of it makes me slightly ill, and not the least bit excited. I never went for it as a boy, and can't see how I ever would as a man. However, if that were a lady in the same position, I would be willing to admit new and delightful possibilities. It's the essential element of excitement for me, the difference between compulsion and revulsion. It has steered my life. If I were gay, and if that fascination were as strong, I could not help but be guided by it.

So, I don't begrudge gay men their ugly tastes. I can't stand the idea myself, but I'm dominated by my own instints, and recognize as justice that they must reconcile themselves to their own.

If you're a Christian, contemplate that God made us all, and God don't make junk.

Collapse -

Corageous coward...

by AnsuGisalas In reply to that's the point because ...

That's a simple transition. Push the right button.

If you want to see homosexual neurosis, you have to find a homosexual who believes what he does to be wrong. That happens in cultures with strong dogmatic indoctrination... as the indoctrination is reduced, so is the neurosis.

But I guess, if all us hetero types lived in a culture where we had to hide our preferences, and feel dogmatic guilt on account of what we like... I guess that'd make us a bit neurotic. Our entire self-image would be entirely different than now, and we would have to invent ways of expressing ourselves that would differ entirely from the homonormative hegemony that'd surround us.
Being forced into rebellion for no good reason is enough to throw any one off the bend.

Collapse -

No serious anthropologist.would consent to this.....

by carlo.di.giorgio In reply to The Natural Order of thin ...

...old and misleading argument misused by gay lobbyists. What you allude to could only be observed among domesticated animals, which have lost most of their natural instincts by leaving so closely to single humans and being dressed to behave as if they were sort of humans. I suggest you consult the famous work of Alfred Adler, if there is an English translation available, in case you are not familiar with difficult German:
- Fischer Verlag -.
Adler, Founder of the Individual Psychology, dismisses categorically any genetic links to this phenomenon defined as neurotic sexual perversion originated by distorted upbringing, social trends, nowadays since early 80's especially promoted by modern media and above all inculcated into themselves by repetitive auto training ''somatization''. All known homosexuals can fit in perfectly well in Adler's discourse. Basically, each of them have their own history behind and that is understandable, since by sound and balanced upbringing and education men should only be spontaneously attracted to women and women to men. All arguments of those who tolerate this neurotic phenomenon as acceptable life style can be easily dismantled on all fronts. The vast majority of world population and serious religions consider homosexuality a dishonorable vice like many others affecting humans. It is only in liberal West where it is nowadays not only tolerated but even promoted and this explains why the West is elsewhere considered decadent. All previous societies affected by such perversion have fallen apart and decayed.

Collapse -

You're wrong.

by AnsuGisalas In reply to No serious anthropologist ...

Zebras, Dingoes and other undomesticatables too.
You're just making up straws to grasp at as you go along.
I now have to decide whether you're intellectually dishonest or simply dishonest or a lying scumbag. I'll get back to you with the results

Related Discussions

Related Forums