NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #27/NN_1992_27.iso/spool/alt/rushlim/10185

Internet Message Format | 1992-11-21 | 4.0 KB

Xref: sparky alt.rush-limbaugh:10185 alt.politics.clinton:17607
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton
Path: sparky!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!darwin.sura.net!spool.mu.edu!umn.edu!csus.edu!beach.csulb.edu!sichermn
From: [e-mail] (Jeff Sicherman)
Subject: Re: Gays in the Military..what nobody is talking about:
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: Cal State Long Beach
References: <bill.722026438@castor> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Distribution: usa
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1992 20:17:59 GMT
Lines: 63

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Ted Kalivoda) writes:
>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Ted Krueger) writes:
>
>>Now we get to the real reason why gays want to be in the military.  They
>>want to take showers with men so they can see a bunch of naked men's
>>bodies.  Get a clue!  The reason why men do not shower with women is
>>because the women feel self conscious.  This is also why gays should
>>not shower with straights.  The straights will feel self conscious.  But
>>oh!  I forgot!  Straights are not a minority, so their feelings are not
>>taken into account.
>>
>>Ted
>
>I do think Ted has something here...something the top media folks have not
>discussed to my knowledge, and especially I do not see any headlines in
>papers over the issue.

  You must have not been watching many talk shows, especially the ones
produced by the News departments.

>
>    *Sexual Attraction:  Men do not shower with women in the military
>because of various reasons, one of them being because of sexual attraction.
>Analogously, why would one want to allow for Men who are sexually attracted
>to Men shower together?  The common response to this question is, "Give me a
>break, sex is not the complete focus of gay men, and they have much sense
>than to stare at other men sexually in the showers."

   Do very many people *really* worry about this. When I go into locker room
(communal) showers I'm there to get unsweaty and clean and then get dried and
dressed. I don't spend a lot of time thinking or worrying about what anyone
around me thinks of my body. It couldn't matter less whether they're gay or
straight - it's going on in their mind and I can't see or hear it and it's
just not my problem or concern.

   Action, or as Clinton has posed it - behavior, is another matter and
being accosted or attacked in any kind of agressive or hostile matter
would be unacceptable. But before you make this a basis of discrimination,
you have to demonstrate that this is a likely and unavoidable consequence.
Personally, I think juvenile, so-called straight men with snapping towel
predilictions are a much bigger danger.

>    Pat Schroeder responded this way on a national news show, but why
>did no one ask her, "Well Pat, how would you feel if 20 men took a shower
>next to you?"  From a straigt perspective, this is quite analogous.  The
>straigt man feels a bit conscious about being looked upon in a sexual manner
>by another man.  Now, another anology...how would you straight men feel if
>you took an open shower along with 20 young women?  From the gay
>perspective, it must be an apporpriate analogy.  When we begin to look at it
>from this perspective, can we not see the difficulties that come to bear?

   It's probably a valid analogy, but I think it reflects more on the nudity
taboos in society and the sexual content that results when men and women
do interact in the limited contexts where nudity is permitted. Do these
fears or discomforts appear in societies (such as some foreign countries
or among nudists) where such taboos do not appear or are not significant ?
If not, then I think it's largely a false analogy because, in general and
especially in single-sex enviroments (sports locker rooms, etc.) these
nudity taboos do not seem to be particularly operative.

--
Jeff Sicherman
up the net without a .sig