Sign Up to Receive Email Action Alerts From Issa Exposed

Bigotry by Any Means Necessary


by Brian Leubitz

Now that the end of DADT is just looking like a matter of timing, homophobia is coming out of the woodwork from top military brass. This is the latest on how they’re going to try to stigmatize gay and lesbian members of the military.

The Marine Corps’ top officer said he would not force straight Marines to share rooms with gay service members if Congress repeals the “don’t ask, don’t tell” law and allows gay men and lesbians to serve openly in the armed forces.

Gen. James T. Conway, the commandant of the Marine Corps, told the Web site in an interview published Friday that an “overwhelming” number of Marines would be opposed to bunking with someone of a different sexual orientation. As a result, he said, the Corps might have to ditch its double-bed rooms and offer single rooms to everyone. (Washington Post)

I get so sick of this, mostly because what these generals are saying is that somehow our soldiers are not only less professional than European militaries, but that they are also less professional than your average college freshman. Furthermore, in times of war, these Marines will be housed in barracks or tents in large groups. Are you going to segregate them there too? It’s simply a preposterous notion, and completely unfeasible.

And guess what, General Conway, there are straight soldiers sharing a room with gay soldiers right now. Yes, it’s true. There have been and will continue to be gay Marines, with or without DADT. It’s a useful fiction perhaps, but continuing to pretend that there aren’t any is laughable. And it simply reduces your own credibility.

But Conway has a reason to be pushing this:

Nathaniel Frank, a senior research fellow at the Palm Center at the University of California at Santa Barbara, said it was highly unlikely that Congress would permit separate rooms or other facilities based on sexual orientation if it votes to end the ban.

“If you have separate facilities, you end up breeding resentment,” Frank said. “I think [Conway] knows that, and I think he was shooting something across the bow to test the limits of how much opponents can do on this.”

This is exactly right. Conway and other “reasonable” generals are gently bringing up logistical issues, pretending that the average marine has very little maturity or professionalism, in an attempt to undermine, stigmatize, and isolate gay and lesbian soldiers. It simply is not acceptable, and his superiors should let him know as much.


  • 1. Richard W. Fitch  |  March 27, 2010 at 12:19 am

    When will we hear the Commander-In-Chief say: Alright, here's how it's going to be. ??

  • 2. Bob  |  March 27, 2010 at 3:36 am

    Daft question again, but who is commander-in -chief, and who gives him his marching orders?

    Can the president give a direct order, that has to be followed, I may be assuming wrong, but isn't he the one that gives the final order to go to war?

    If he has all that power, but can't repeal a fricking order like DADT, there's something wrong!!!!

  • 3. Dan Hess  |  March 27, 2010 at 4:12 am

    The President is Commander-In-Chief. Richard was berating Obama for not just sitting his military advisers down and saying "Oy, fuckwads. A person being gay is not a reason to exclude him from military service, ESPECIALLY when we don't have enough of a military force as it is. Forcing people to lie can never be good for morale, so DADT undermines the effectiveness of our military. I want it overturned, I want it overturned NOW, and you WILL do it because I own your asses."

    …more diplomatically than that, of course, but still. He DOES have every right to do it and he should.

  • 4. Blaise Pascal  |  March 27, 2010 at 4:27 am

    Unfortunately, he can't repeal DADT; it's Federal law approved and passed by Congress. He can ask them to repeal it, he can order the military to implement it as much in favor of gays as possible, but he can't order the military to ignore Federal law.

  • 5. Mandy  |  March 29, 2010 at 3:40 am

    Pardon my ignorance but does the us military fall under the executive or legislative branch? I thought it was the executive branch because the president was the commander and chief. Of course congress would be about the money side of the military but where does their power to even have the dadt policy come from.

  • 6. Monty  |  March 29, 2010 at 4:09 am

    Congress does have some direct control over the military (they can declare war, for example). As far as DADT, that is federal legislation (also Congress's domain) which applies to the military.

  • 7. Bob  |  March 27, 2010 at 8:40 am

    Why doen't he just simply declare war on homophobia, and root it out of the military, all out attack, homophobia is a form of terrorism.
    Is someone saying, the president is not in charge of the decision making, He has to first get approval from congress, this is now an emergency situation, we have to drive that point home.
    Come on Mr. President, give a command,

  • 8. Waxr  |  March 27, 2010 at 2:45 pm

    When Bill Clinton announced his plan to allow gays and lesbians to openly serve in the military, he was stabbed in the back by the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff: Colin Powell. Powell went on national TV in opposition to Clinton's plan, thus dooming it. Powell should have been fired right there. Powell had the right and the duty to advise the president, but as a military officer he had no right to publically speak out against his Commander and Chief.

    Generals have been court martialed for such behavior. Most famous is General Billy Mitchell who in the 1920's was demoted to colonel for his criticisms of the army (He dared to say that Hawaii was vulnerable to an air attack by Japan.) General Paton was reprimanded for statements he made about the Soviet Union, and General Douglas MacArthur was reprimanded and eventually fired for statements he made about Red China and Korea. The fact that all three of these generals may have been correct is irrelevant. They had no right making such statements.

    Today, high ranking generals are following Colin Powell's example and getting away with it. General Conway has the right to state his opinion on DADT if he is asked for it by the President or by Congress. He had no right to go to a public web site and air his opinions. If General Conway is told to do away with DADT he has the choice to either obey orders, or resign. If General Conway saw to it that the marines are properly trained, there will be no problem.

    (Note: Douglas MacArthur was the only member of Billy Mitchell's five member court martial panel who voted "not guilty.")

  • 9. Ronnie  |  March 27, 2010 at 12:21 am

    "that an “overwhelming” number of Marines would be opposed to bunking with someone of a different sexual orientation."

    (me) it's so sad that he says this….and again shows the level of lying, fact and word twisting that the Hateros seem so incapable of doing perfectly…..

    unfortunately for them the latest polling(although I don't put much faith in polling) says quite the contrary….that the majority of the armed forces wants DADT repealed and does not care about another soldiers SO…..

    I said it yesterday and I'll say it again….I have fully lost any respect for most of the higher ups of our USA armed forces…..and feel that we are no more protected by them then we would be by a puppy shitzu…….<3…Ronnie

  • 10. Bob  |  March 27, 2010 at 8:43 am

    They are opposed to sleeping in shared quarters with homosexuals, but they have no quams, about jumping on command to invade a country, and slaughter innocent civilians. come on

  • 11. Ed-M  |  March 27, 2010 at 12:44 am

    Cripes. Does he really think that Marine recruits have become less mature since senior high school? Not to mention junior high? C'mon, Conway, we've ALL been in gang shower situations, gay, bi, bi-curious and straight men together ever since the great post-WW2 school construction boom!

    If any young men have a problem with LGBTIQQ people these days… it's probably because they're gay, bi, or bi-curious themselves and absolutely do not want to deal with it other than by repressing themselves!

  • 12. Ed-M  |  March 27, 2010 at 12:48 am

    And when I was in college (and closeted), I had both openly and closeted gay and bisexual roommates… IIRC even when I was horrified at my own sexuality (due to christian indoctrination) I didn't look down at my roommates let alone lash out at them, either verbally or physically. These Marines can learn to do the same.

  • 13. Sagesse  |  March 27, 2010 at 12:55 am

    Not sure about this, but it seems Conway is appointed for a four year term that ends in Nov 2010. He can pontificate until then, but will then fade into history. His opinion will be duly noted, but he will be, and probably is now regarded as a lame duck. If the momentum is there to pass DADT repeal, his successor will probably be chosen to have a more supportive point of view. Regardless, if one of the service heads continues to oppose repeal, don't think there's a requirement for unanimity for Congress to act. Call me an optimist.

    It would still be nice if Gates and Mullen would publicly or privately suggest he tone it down, as they did with Mixon.

  • 14. Nick J. West  |  March 27, 2010 at 1:23 am

    "There have been and will continue to be gay marines, with or without DADT."

    Marine when referring to a United States Marine is ALWAYS capitalized!

  • 15. Blaise Pascal  |  March 27, 2010 at 1:39 am

    Back when Clinton was elected, he supported an end on the ban of gays in the military, a policy goal which lead to the botched DADT policy of today.

    But during the political manouverings which led to the DADT policy, when the idea of a removal of the ban was still on the table, I seem to recall hearing of a general in charge of one of the branches as saying something to the effect that while he didn't approve of gays in the military and thought lifting the ban was a bad idea, if he was ordered to implement a lifting of the ban and integrating the forces under him, he would do so, effectively and quickly, because that was his job.

    Is Conway suggesting that the US Marine Corps is less professional than it was 16 years ago?

  • 16. Bose  |  March 27, 2010 at 1:46 am

    Are Conway and other “reasonable” generals suggesting that a Marine's objection to bunking with a peer of different race, national origin, or religious beliefs would be honored today?

    Of course not…

    The amazing thing to me is that these leaders speak as if they've never served with a competent gay person. If they had, they'd be prepared to lead the way instead of getting in the way.

  • 17. robiedo  |  March 27, 2010 at 3:27 am

    Yes, and building on your comment, Bose, I want to add that the (insulting for most members of the military, I would expect) implication that Marines are constitutionally incapable of respecting difference does not bode well for the citizens of other nations where Marine are deployed and whose cultures differ, even in the slightest, from mainstream U.S. culture. It's all so frickin ridiculous, and just keeps making me madder and madder.

  • 18. HunterR.  |  March 27, 2010 at 2:19 am

    And the battle for equal rights continues as we gain our rightful place in society at large. Here and article about a comment of a Mexican singer regarding gays and adoption, “she'd rather see a child die on the streets than be adopted by a same-sex couple” I just read the article and since I am from Mexico and spent the last few weeks there this hit home. If you follow the threads to this article is encouraging to observe the denunciations of this type of comments as what they are. Hate pure and simple.
    here is the link to the LA Times

  • 19. Ronnie  |  March 27, 2010 at 2:30 am

    I heard about her…..she did apologize for making those statements and scheduled a concert at a gay club to apologize…..hehehehehe…..if only it were that easy…. yeah?……."up her ziggy with a wha wha brush"….is all I have to say….pft……<3….Ronnie

  • 20. Kathleen  |  March 27, 2010 at 3:33 am

    I found it interesting that she said her comments were rooted in her "poor education" and small-town upbringing. I don't know that I've ever seen an apology from someone that so frankly admitted the comments were the result of ignorance.

  • 21. dieter  |  March 27, 2010 at 4:24 am

    It has been proven by study after study, that people who are religious, or homophobic, or republican are as a whole less educated and earn less money than a typical democrat or non religious and non homophobic person.

    I think this may have a direct link to the recent Texas schoolboard decision to change history in the text books, so that they can keep all the young people coming up, uneducated about reality, history, and facts. With all the studies finding that young people and educated people showing clear signs of aiming towards the democratic party, and total acceptance of others like gays who are not like them, changing history and keeping kids dumb is the ONLY way they have left to even attempt to keep the republican party viable.
    as it stands, within a few generations, if things continue as they are..the republican party would be a thing of the past.

    their only hope is to re-write history, and teach kids their version that the entire country is based on religion, and that democrats did not exist, or when they did..they hurt people.

    their books will NEVER be used in my state of California….

  • 22. HunterR.  |  March 27, 2010 at 11:45 am

    She did say the "I have gay friends" and still added that her opinion is that she doesn't endorse adoptions by ss couples. mmmmhhhhhh……..

  • 23. Richard A. Walter (s  |  March 27, 2010 at 3:38 am

    General Conway is about as reasonable as Bull Connor.

  • 24. Dan Hess  |  March 27, 2010 at 4:17 am

    Oh gods, REALLY? Next year, I and two other guys will be rooming together with one of my best friends, who is gay. I will be sleeping in the same room with him and I will have NO problem with it. I'm also straight as can be. Give it a REST already. If we have anyone in the military who's THAT fucking stupid, why are WE stupid enough to give them guns and trust them to fight for America's safety? That sort of bigotry is one of the primary THREATS to Americans.

  • 25. dieter  |  March 27, 2010 at 4:55 am

    Two of the three Dixie chicks, under the name "courtyard hounds" have released a new song called "aint no son".

    the song is about a young man coming out to his father, and what homophobia sounds like when he does.

    I just listened to it, and while hillbilly music is not my thing, this song is powerful.

    I say hillbilly, because it aint country…it is hillbilly..LOl

    Kudos to them being as big as they are for having the courage to make a mainstream song discussing the issue. unfortunately, they had to not use "dixie chicks" as the way to sell it, and instead had to change the name.

  • 26. Bolt  |  March 27, 2010 at 5:28 am

    This Marine top officer has articulated, beautifully the parallels between race discrimination, and sexual orientation discrimination. It was a real gift! We should thank this bigot. He proved everything that we've been saying. Racism, sexism, homophobia, agism, they're all the same. If you exercise one, you exercise all of them! Bigots are disgusting!

  • 27. Straight Ally #3008  |  March 27, 2010 at 6:38 am

    “overwhelming” number of Marines would be opposed to bunking with someone of a different sexual orientation.

    [citation needed]

    On a more serious note, I want to thank everyone here at P8TT who has served in the Armed Forces. You put your life on the line for the rest of us, and nothing I could write here could properly express my gratitude.

  • 28. Papa Foma  |  March 27, 2010 at 11:34 pm

    Well I never minded when I was in the military. In fact, at that time, it was the supposedly straight ones that were always 'disrupting' unit cohesion with their antics. Papa Foma

  • 29. Ronnie  |  March 27, 2010 at 9:11 am

    Posted on March 27, 2010
    Georgia Community Speaks Out Against Martin
    By Editors

    (me) I would not be surprised if somebody does to Georgia what was done to it during the Civil War….I'm just saying…..

    "In what was described as a rally, residents of Cochran, Ga., spoke out against Derrick Martin, the gay student planning to bring a male date to his prom."

    (me) It really was just a few uneducated redneck (the bad kind) Hateros standing around talking …..

    "A gay high school student in Bleckley County is defying the community's wishes, and bringing his boyfriend to the prom."

    (me) FU<K the GD community….his parents pay taxes too…. even if they are ingrate inbred Hateros……Get over yourselves……

    "Residents like "worried father" Bobby Duskin aired their concerns ……… "I'm going to speak out," …… "Because I’m a father, and I’m proud to be a father and I’m going to look out for my kids no matter what and I’m going to stand up for them no matter what."

    (me) Again but why can't Derrick speak out?……f-ing hypocrite….protect your kids from what?…..seeing 2 boys dance together?…..OMG the sky is falling….my kids saw 2 boys dance together…..they're going into cardiac arrest…….CLEAR!!!!……..zhzhzhzhzhzhzzhz……WOW!!!!…..

    at the end of the article theres a link to the full story with a video….these people are so amusing to watch….but Derrick is awesome……

    from the full story and video:

    “You sit here and you tell me that if somebody walked up to you and you've already paid all your money to go a prom that you've waited 11 years to go to and it’s a sacred event and somebody walks in and says ‘Oh I’m gay, I’m going to do a walk through with another guy,” one concerned citizen named Cochran complained on camera."

    (me) 1st…. seriously you have the same name as the town you live in…..2nd…..he paid too….selfish Hatero B!tch…..3rd….WTF is a walk through?…..ummm its a dance…..unless you are going to "walk like an Egyptian" or "walk 500 miles"…..or "WALK THIS WAY"…..ummmm IT"S A DANCE!!!!…..I lost brain cells listening to her talk…..

    Duskin’s(the @sswhole above) daughter, Amber, a senior who refuses to go to the prom because Derrick will be there with his boyfriend. “It’s not just his prom, it’s my prom too and everybody else's at the school,” Amber said.

    (me) so because you don't like his date he can't bring him?…..well same to you Ellie May….honey please…it's his prom too…He's number one…two….get over yourself….you pecan tart….hehehehe….I called her a pecan tart….hehehe……

    “After school and system officials reviewed prom rules and procedures and legal precedent, the school informed the individual that there were no rules or policies that would prevent him from bringing his friend to the prom."

    (me) Just following the rules…..DEAL WITH IT!!!!…..<3…Ronnie

    and P.S. I got the phone number of that, Bobby Duskin from COCHRAN, Ga….just google it….its the first thing that comes up….interesting he lives on Duskin Drive….I can't….I can't

    "If the road you live on is the same as your last name….well then you just might be a redneck(the bad kind)…..bwaaaaa….<3 again…..Ronnie

  • 30. Ronnie  |  March 27, 2010 at 12:08 pm

    There is a FB page to show your support for Derrick Martin from Cochran, Ga…….I just became a fan you guys should too…..<3….Ronnie:

  • 31. Kathleen  |  March 27, 2010 at 1:30 pm

    Did you read this story?

    When his parents found text messages between him and someone he was dating, they took his car, ipod, etc., anything to keep him from communicating with the other boy. This is so crazy. I don't know what parents think they'll accomplish, but what they actually accomplish is just pushing their kid away. (which apparently they don't care about, given that they've made him leave home). Arrrggghhh. Some people just don't deserve their wonderful gay kids.!!!!! (wish I could adopt them all).

  • 32. Ronnie  |  March 27, 2010 at 1:49 pm

    I guess all that crazy forceful Hatero parenting didn't work yeah?…..I guess they also didn't hear about free will…..Some people just don't deserve kids in general….his parents should be ashamed of themselves for being so ugly……I don't know about his whole family but If he is their only son I hope they are NEVER blessed with another child……and regret EVER forsaking their son…..their blood…..f-ing Hateros……<3…Ronnie

  • 33. Ronnie  |  March 27, 2010 at 2:02 pm

    However I am glad they had him…..he seems like a good kid….no matter how ugly and hate filled they are……they raised a great kid……too bad they most likely may not get to be apart of the rest of his wonderful life….what's that phrase?……blood is thicker then water……guess they only have water running through their veins….That's awesome of the GMC for doing that for him…..its so pathetic when complete strangers treat your kids better then you do….yeah?……JMHGO……Thanks for posting that article Kathleen…..I hadn't read that one yet……<3…Ronnie

  • 34. Kathleen  |  March 27, 2010 at 2:04 pm

    It goes even beyond blood, imo. I don't care how well someone seems to handle it… it HURTS to have your parents reject you. These are the people who are supposed to be keeping you safe and teaching, through their behavior toward you, that you are deserving of love. It takes a long time for someone to get over this kind of rejection. I break into tears every time I read these stories.

  • 35. Ronnie  |  March 27, 2010 at 10:37 am

    You know what …… far as I'm concerned this sure as hell means war………

    Posted on March 27, 2010
    Palin Heckler Removed from Event
    By Advocate,com Editors

    "Palin's speech was loudly interrupted by a heckler who was then forcefully tossed out of the event and held down by security personnel. The young male heckler later said he loved America, but not John McCain."

    (me) so he gets arrested for heckling and using his freedom of speech but the teabuggers who call people the n-word and the f-word and spit at people don't?…..h I see……..THIS MEANS WAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!…….

    there's a video at the bottom of the article of I one of the guys who were removed…… pinned to the ground by 2 HUGE white trash looking mother fellers…..screaming at the top of his lungs while the police or security whatever the hell the are took their sweet times…..(FU<K the POlice)……oh and some white trash b!tch called him a "Douche" (I think)……..What did I say?….Civil War II…….Bring it on Hateros…….BRING……IT…..ONNNNNN!!!!……<3…Ronnie

  • 36. Ronnie  |  March 27, 2010 at 10:38 am

    Here's the link to the other Heckler who was removed…..Freedom of speech huh?….pft…..<3…Ronnie:

  • 37. Ronnie  |  March 27, 2010 at 10:51 am

    Here's the first video….<3….Ronnie:

    I Just don't like McCain….hehehe……He doesn't like Obama either but whatever… speak out against the conservative reich….. you get arrested…..point taken….Nazi much?

  • 38. draNgNon  |  March 27, 2010 at 5:42 pm

    You guys seem to be overlooking something important here. When brass talks about a breakdown of discipline etc, they are not talking about discrimination. They are talking about soldiers operating without having sexual entanglements in combat zones.

    So – the military doesn't bunk potential sexual partners together. That's part of the justification for keeping women out of combat and submarines. Yes, they still do keep women out. From this perspective, if you let the gays bunk with members of the same sex – potential sexual partners, basically – openly, that's key, with DADT it's by definition not open – where has the justification gone for keeping women out of combat? For housing them in separate quarters? Poof! It's gone, gone, gone.

    FWIW I read a couple weeks ago – in the BBC News, I guess they are keeping it quiet here – that the American military is prepping to lift the ban on women in combat roles and submarines. Reading that gave me more confidence than anything else that they are serious about getting rid of DADT. I'm pretty sure all these rules have to be evaluated together, and that's why they need to do some studies on what to do.

    I don't believe for an instant it's about being better behaved than a college freshman – which many recruits wouldn't be, actually. It's because they need a consistent story for removing the ban on having potential sexual entanglements between troops in combat zones.

  • 39. Ronnie  |  March 27, 2010 at 11:59 pm

    They don't need to do studies….other countries have already done them…….JUST DO IT!!!……sexual tension is larger when its bottled up…..not an argument to stop repeal……repeal NOW…..JUST DO IT!!!!……There are already gay people serving the tension is already there….if the can't handle sleeping next to a gay soldier then they aren't man or woman enough to be serving….repeal now…..JUST DO IT!!!!……stop making up excuses…….stop wasting our tax dollars on discrimination…..repeal NOW!!…..JUST DO IT!!!….or else we'll FORSE YOU TO DO IT!!!!……..<3…Ronnie

  • 40. fiona64  |  March 28, 2010 at 3:05 am

    Um, women are in combat already. They are pilots, nurses, interrogators, doctors, turret gunners on tanks and more. The only MOS they are denied is infantry, but that doesn't mean they are non-combatant.

    A female soldier has a 50/50 chance of being raped by a fellow servicemember, BTW, according to recent statistics.

    Fiona (a former DoD civilian with gal-pals who were in combat …)

  • 41. draNgNon  |  March 28, 2010 at 5:56 am

    dtd 24 February 2010 – barely a month ago

    The US defence department has decided to allow women to serve aboard submarines, according to officials.

    Defence Secretary Robert Gates has approved the recommendation and sent letters to Congress informing them of the plan.

    Congress now has 30 days to approve the measure.
    The move comes as the US Army's chief of staff said it was time to revisit rules restricting women in combat roles.

    Women are still barred from traditional frontline roles in the armed forces.
    General George Casey told Congress on Tuesday that he supports a reconsideration of the role of women in combat.
    "I believe it's time that we take a look at what women are actually doing in Iraq and Afghanistan. And then we look at our policies," he said.

    Separate quarters

    Fifteen per cent of the US Navy personnel are female, and women have worked alongside men on surface ships and aircraft since 1993.

    It was thought the very cramped conditions in submarines precluded both sexes working together.

    It is expected it will take a year before the first women can be trained for American submarine duties.

    The vessels will also need to be modified to give men and women separate quarters.

    notice, the problem is separate quarters.

    regarding the 50% rape statistic you cite, that just supports my argument about the need to take some time to look into what to do. it all has to be looked at together. a 50% chance that a woman will be raped by a fellow service member is NOT, imo, a good justification for repealing DADT without taking a bit of care looking into how associated regulations should change.

    I mean seriously. how many people on this board will react badly if the US armed forces "just did it" and within a couple weeks we read about some gay private deciding he would be out and flamboyant and he got raped.

    y'all would scream about how horrible the military was at not taking steps to prevent it.

  • 42. fiona64  |  March 29, 2010 at 12:21 am

    So, by your logic, DragNon, any woman who is raped must have been "asking for it." After all, your example has a gay man who "got himself raped."

    Why shouldn't the fault lie with the RAPIST?

    Rape is about power, not about sex.


  • 43. Ed  |  March 27, 2010 at 8:56 pm

    Wouldn't it be good policy, instead of firing Generals for disobeying orders, and thus creating martyrs and political opponents, simply to demote them significantly. That way you also don't lose the skills they've been taught at some expense, but it sends a clear message who's boss.

  • 44. Ronnie  |  March 28, 2010 at 12:04 am

    Demote them completely to private, plebe, what ever the lowest form of soldier is….strip them of EVER award ans merit they earned……I don't care if they saved lives…..completely embarrass them…..if they still don't change…..FIRE them with a dishonorable discharge…..they will never get a job…..they want to treat people like nothing……THEY GET NOTHING!!!!……..<3….Ronnie

  • 45. Thomasito  |  March 27, 2010 at 11:28 pm

    Off topic but none-the-less a very good and relevant article:….

    So the repugnacan'ts are hot under the collar not because a predominantly right leaning healthcare reform was passed, but because it was passed by a queer, a spic, a bitch and a Nigger! Now they want to "Take the country back!" This country was founded by wealthy protestant straight men (mostly) and should be ruled only by them with only their obedient white non-kike wives by their sides!!!

    On a more realistic note…I hope the rest of the country becomes unnerved by this madness and turns majorly (majority-ly) democratic so that we can get some shtuff done!

  • 46. Ronnie  |  March 28, 2010 at 12:16 am

    And that is why I am utterly offended and disgusted by the conservative reich…..I am a 25yo gay man, the women who helped raise me when my white mother left my father and lived out of hotels while she busted her @$$ to make money in nonsense minimum wage jobs until she got a steady job in a hospital are Puerto Rican, My mother can be a B!tch when she wants to be….oh what am I saying….the woman is FIERCE….(and well I'm a b!tch too) and my father is African with ancestry dating back to slavery… with me they just insult, degrade, disrespect the full spectrum of who i am….now if they started calling people "Micks"…….then I will have to cut a b!tch……JMHGNBM…..<3….Ronnie

  • 47. jayjaylanc  |  March 28, 2010 at 11:54 pm

    You know why some of the top brass and the more recalcitrant of officers and enlisted members are so against the repeal of DADT? Pure projection. They're scared to death that gay men are going to do to them what they do to female servicemembers so often. There is a whole department devoted to investigating sexual assaults, primarily against female servicemembers. And we're talking actual sexual assaults, not harassment, which has its own department.

    They're afraid that their chickens will come home to roost and that they'll be subject to their own tactics used against them. It's pure projection, as it always seems to be with right-wing adherents.

  • 48. fiona64  |  March 29, 2010 at 12:24 am

    Of course you're right, Homophobia is deeply rooted in misogyny.

    Very good article here:

    Quote: The fear of being made "a woman" by another man will send an otherwise shallow and apathetic man into a letter-writing, Focus on the Family-contributing, Republican-voting lunatic. Show me a man who hates gay males and I'll show you a man who despises women.


  • 49. Bigotry by Any Means Nece&hellip  |  March 28, 2010 at 11:51 pm

    […] 29, 2010 by Michael Leon · Leave a Comment  ShareFrom by Brian Leubitz at Prop Eight Trial Tracker: Now that the end of DADT (Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell) is just looking like a matter of […]

  • 50. Bigotry in the Military b&hellip  |  March 29, 2010 at 12:00 am

    […] by Brian Leubitz at Prop Eight Trial Tracker: Now that the end of DADT (Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell) is just looking like a matter of […]

  • 51. Carvel  |  March 30, 2010 at 1:09 am

    These are the same arguments that were made when the military discussed about letting Blacks serve in the same units as whites. How quickly the people forget that the difference between discrimination of gays, Blacks and any minority in not different. Yet, you can't tell some of the other minorities who do have their rights and freedoms protected by law that we are also a minority entitled to our civil rights. The more things change, the more they stay the same.

  • 52. K!r!lleXXI  |  April 2, 2010 at 11:29 pm

    [{ Follow the comments }]

  • 53. Name - Bleckley where it &hellip  |  November 3, 2010 at 5:27 pm

    […] Bigotry by Any Means Necessary " Prop 8 Trial Tracker […]

Having technical problems? Visit our support page to report an issue!