Return to: Homepage | Blog Index
32 Responses
Comments are closed.
(or browse the Archives by date, category, tags etc)
get blog updates
Recent Comments
- Norma on “Kill the Gays” Bill is Back in Uganda
- Sarah Harper on FNTT Season 8, Round 1: the He-Man Woman-Haters Club edition
- 10G on Women refuses to give raped daughter EC, brags about it on internet.
- Azalea on The Annual Post About Sexist Super Bowl Commercials 2012
- LotusBen on The Annual Post About Sexist Super Bowl Commercials 2012
- Ornytus on Pete Hoekstra is super racist, doesn’t understand the word “satire”
- Mórrígan on The Annual Post About Sexist Super Bowl Commercials 2012
- Argenti Aertheri on Prudie on “real” rape
- Celeste on The Annual Post About Sexist Super Bowl Commercials 2012
- ginmar on Prudie on “real” rape
Most Commented Recent Posts
- An Asexual Map for Sex-Positive Feminism (138)
- So should we just start calling high heels "body modification"? (128)
- Some Transformative Justice Links (127)
- Women refuses to give raped daughter EC, brags about it on internet. (125)
- Prudie on "real" rape (105)
- FNTT Season 8, Round 1: the "So a girl and a vibrator walk onto a plane..." edition (89)
- FNTT Season 8, Round 1: the REAL FEMINISTS edition (77)
- Facts, myths, and blankety-blank lies about Planned Parenthood and the Susan G. Komen Foundation (64)
- FNTT Season 8, Round 1: The Baby-Killing Whores Edition (63)
- FNTT Season 8, Round 1: the Slutty Slut-Sluts edition (62)
Yes Means Yes!
Reproductive Health Matters
We’re in the Guardian
More of Feministe On
For wordpress.com support
just for you, a widget as requested
Sponsored By
Tried and Tested
The authors of this website have hand-selected these titles because we believe they may be of interest to a feminist audience.
Consider them for gifts to friends, family, or yourself! We do receive some income if you choose to order these titles based on our recommendations. All funds help support our costs to provide this space.
Consider them for gifts to friends, family, or yourself! We do receive some income if you choose to order these titles based on our recommendations. All funds help support our costs to provide this space.
Oh hell yes.
finally some good news!
Just like “impeachment is off the table”, so is this one. I’m not trying to offend anyone, I’m just putting it out there.
If Obama wants to curry favor with the military, who didn’t vote for him, he’s gonna do what ever it takes to get in their good graces.
May it be as Gibbs suggests.
DADT is a stupid policy and I’m glad to be seeing it go. Besides the fact that this is discriminatory, it is also a stupid policy. Several people, including badly-needed Arabic translators, have been discharged because they were gay.
Firing gay people with badly-needed skills; social consies’ way of supporting the troops.
Angela,
It may surprise you (it shocked the hell out of me, being ex-military) but people in the military are overwhelmingly in favor of overturning DADT. Someone close to me is Army Infantry, and he said this matches with his experience–and infantry is male-only and about as macho as you get. There was a zogby poll about this recently.
About damn time.
I agree Ismone. I used to be friends with several ROTC folks and they all wanted DADT done away with.
Not only were they upset that they could be killed because someone with rare/quality skills had been fired, but also because it meant they could get discharged if they were friends with queer folks, spoke out against homophobia, were “too masculine/feminine”, etc.
I’m old enough to remember Bill Clinton promising he’d end discrimination against gays in the military.
I’m also old enough to remember that this promise morphed into “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell”.
It’s great that Obama has said he’ll end discrimination against gays in the military. When he does it, I’ll applaud.
But given that he and Rick Warren are BFF, and given how cheap’n'easy it’s going to be for Obama to make nice with the military by changing his mind on allowing LGBT people to serve openly, I don’t see any good reason to applaud him for doing something when all he’s done is make a promise. The same promise Clinton made. As easily broken.
great news!
Pro: ending unjust discrimination against men and women in the armed services, which in the long run will only benefit our nation’s military
Con: in the long run it will only benefit our nation’s military
From Mr. Obama so far, we’ve had a lot of progressive promises, followed by right-wing choices. So from the track record, I’d expect a promise to overturn DADT, followed by it being replaced with letting them kick out gays again.
I also remember Clinton’s promise. Promises are for campaigns; betrayals are what happens once the administration gets the power.
You’re all in favour of this? Bloody hell, i wouldn’t have expected so much pro-militarism here.
What this is is preparation for a draft. They are closing the loophole that would allow people to get out of being drafted by being (or claiming to be) gay.
The “right” to join, or be forced to join, an organisation whose purpose for existence is rape and murder is not one that any feminist should be supporting or campaigning for.
Fuck the military… or, in fact, probably better not to, you don’t know what you’ll catch.
Shiva: Get over yourself.
If you want to speak out against the military-industrial complex, then good for you. I’d join you. But what you said was VERY disrespectful to those of us who are in the military or who have loved ones who serve. You were way out of line.
wow Shiva, I’m not offended, and I have just as many problems with the military, but I am missing your logic. Whether I agree with military actions or not isn’t the point. The point is, that if straight people do it, and LGBTQ people want to do it, they should have the right, no matter what it is. I think marriage is a ridiculous social institution based on religion, property laws, and the subjugation of women. Do I want to do it, no. But that isn’t the point. If I have the right to choose it, so should LGBTQ people. And I don’t think claiming to be gay really got too many people out of the military. I would rather people choose conscientious objection than pretend to be gay like it is some horrible thing, further stigmatizing gay people.
“But what you said was VERY disrespectful to those of us who are in the military or who have loved ones who serve. ”
Good. They deserve disrespect.
I’ll make myself 100% clear: if you volunteer to “serve” (and what a disgusting euphemism that is) in an imperialist army whose purpose for existence is the brutal subjugation of people across the world, then i don’t give a flying fuck about whatever “patriotic” bullshit you swallowed about “protecting your nation”, you’re the same kind of human waste as Kyle Payne or any other rapist, and anyone who loves you needs to open up their fucking eyes and disown you.
“The point is, that if straight people do it, and LGBTQ people want to do it, they should have the right, no matter what it is.”
Straight men rape their partners, beat their children, etc. Should LGBTQ people have the right to do those?
Straight men rape their partners, beat their children, etc. Should LGBTQ people have the right to do those?
You think that’s a right?
As Joshua point out, no one has a legal right to beat their partners or children. What we’re talking about here is the right to do something. I’m no fan of militarism either, but I’ll leave it up to individuals to decide whether or not they join the military. And most people aren’t joining the military so that they can go partake in imperialist wars; they’re doing it so that they can pay for college, or get training for a particular job, or because they believe national defense is important, or because they don’t see many other options.
The issue isn’t that we all want the military to be huge; it’s that we don’t like to see places discriminate. I don’t like cosmetic surgery either, but I’d think it was wrong if surgeons were only allowed to be men, or straight, or white.
1) If DADT is successfully repealed (read without a backlash) it will largely be because Obama kept Gates on at the Pentagon, which was a pretty popular move within the military.
2) @Shiva – I agree wholeheartedly. Disproportionately underprivileged people deserve our disrespect – no, our contempt – for what they see as serving their country, as per the values transmitted by their families, communities and leaders. Granted, they may have never been told what the United States has done abroad, and so don’t realize that they’re joining an “imperialist” army. And granted, maybe they do, but are joining because of a lack of options. But since when have we let an awareness of people’s lives get in the way of our petulant self-righteousness? Amirite, amirite?
Good. They deserve disrespect.
I’ll make myself 100% clear: if you volunteer to “serve” (and what a disgusting euphemism that is) in an imperialist army whose purpose for existence is the brutal subjugation of people across the world, then i don’t give a flying fuck about whatever “patriotic” bullshit you swallowed about “protecting your nation”, you’re the same kind of human waste as Kyle Payne or any other rapist, and anyone who loves you needs to open up their fucking eyes and disown you.
Lady, where the fuck do you get off? Do you have any concept whatsoever of what motivates people to join the military? I’ll give you a hint: for very few people is it about the joys of warfare and colonialism. (Anyone who thinks war is just some sort of big adventure has never been deployed.) The overwhelming majority of Soldiers I serve with are there because the Army is giving them a chance to go to college that they otherwise wouldn’t have been able to afford, are trying to take care of family members who need health insurance, and who have spent too much time being unemployed and are desperate.
Get down off the high horse, and quit pretending you understand what it is that drives people to participate in institutions you find repugnant. The Army doesn’t need a draft because it already has one: it’s just de facto for poorer kids. And that’s appalling in its own way.
Shorter Shiva: WAAAAAAAAAAAAAH the world doesn’t look like I want it to WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH
I’m fine with criticizing the military industrial complex and the pentagon as an institution.
I think its out of line to paint all individuals who serve as morally corrupt pawns for an imperialist agenda. Individual people choices in life for a variety of reasons, many of which none of us can stand in judgement of.
And, its important to note the the military serves as a proxy, a pawn if you will, for corporate and economic interests. If this is the road you want to go down, then the military is merely a tool employed by corporate powers and monied interests. The military is just a tool for the corporate overlords in that sense. So, if we’re going to hold people who serve in the military to account for some phantom vision of morality, anyone who has worked in the corporate,world has to be held to the same standard.
If you can get past the anger, all of you make some very good points about the military. Unfortunately they don’t really have to do with the topic. And if they do influence your opinion on whether LGBTQ people should be able to serve in the military, then that is incredibly condescending and patronizing. LGBTQ people have the right to form their own opinion about the military. They don’t need your protection, Shiva. If they want to be volunteers or pawns, whichever way you might see it, they have the right to make that choice.
Well, all of the above is basically why I tried sum it up in a short pro/con…
…and it’s official, Obama throws gays and lesbians (further) under the bus:
The excuse? The economy. Yeah, getting support for action to fix the economy (supported by 90% of Americans) somehow requires Team O to renege on promises to gays. Oh sorry, not “renege”…”put off”. As in, until 2013. Or maybe 2017…
Even more bizzarely (unless you have been listening to Republicans too much) somehow fixing the economy requires that we delay getting more money from the wealthiest sliver of citizens. Go figure! I guess they need all that money to boost their own consumer confidence, right? Otherwise they’ll all get paranoid and keep it in their giant vaults full of gold. (cue DuckTales theme)
[...] [h/t to Jill at Feministe] [...]
this just made my (so far kind of crappy) morning.
Disproportionately underprivileged people deserve our disrespect – no, our contempt – for what they see as serving their country, as per the values transmitted by their families, communities and leaders.
The members of the military are not “disproportionately underprivileged” – most of them are working class, not poverty class. Educate yourself and you’ll offend a lot fewer people with your ignorance.
Re: DADT, I’ll believe it when it happens. Obama also said he was going to close Guantanamo Bay within his first 100 days. Now, not so much.
I don’t know if you noticed Emma, but my comment was an exercise in sarcasm.
“Straight men rape their partners, beat their children, etc. Should LGBTQ people have the right to do those?”
LOL, what? Shiva, to be blunt: This comment is completely, 100% idiotic and your points are now completely fucking invalid. What a horrible, idiotic analogy! Deciding to go into the military =/= men raping and beating their children and wives. Jesus Christ. That is EXACTLY like saying, “Well, if you think two men should be able to marry, you must think a man should be able to marry his dog, right? I MEAN DUH!”
How ’bout … no.
And btw, shiva, no one has the right to beat or rape. You have no knowledge on what the word “right” means, and it’s quite obvious you lack a knowledge of why people choose to go to the military. It’s also evident that you’re awesome at sweeping generalizations of people in general. In short: You’re an idiot.