Is Bradley Manning an Example of Why LGBT People Should Not Serve?

The US military is no place for gay men questioning their gender

Seeking a lower sentence, Manning's defence team argued his senior officers missed a number of "red flags" that should have led them to revoking the young soldier's security clearance. Much of his psychological instability stemmed from the military's harsh treatment of those who do not conform to the mainstream. As a gay man, who additionally was struggling with gender identity disorder, Manning felt ostracised. The evidence presented in court made it seem at least plausible that, with proper support and care, he might never have turned against the army.

I don't believe military service is a career for those who are having issues with their sexuality nor is it a place where political correctness should be embraced. While I fully support LGBT people having the same legal rights as any other American citizen, I still question the wisdom of removing the Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy.

Ultimately our military must be able to function at peak efficiency at all times and the men and women of our armed forces must be able to complete complex tasks and critical missions in the face of great danger. The US Army should not be in the business of making people 'more comfortable'. The resources of our armed forces are there to defend our nation, not to deal with complex social issues and the identity crisis of its soldiers.

I feel that Bradley Manning was dealing with a number of mental health issues that should have red flagged his security clearance and the US could have avoided much of the ensuing embarrassment.

PVT Manning is now Chelsea

U.S. Military No Place for Men to Question Their Gender

American Hero Now Gay Hero

reply to post by Metallicus

I don't believe military service is a career for those who are having issues with their sexuality nor is it a place where political correctness should be embraced.

The first problem with this idea is the assumption that all LGBT have 'issues' with their sexuality.

The truth is most don't. They are perfectly happy and accepting of themselves. Most often than not, it other people who create the problems regarding a particular person's sexuality.

Considering Manning never made mention of this during his service, I don't see the comparison as being very good.

~Tenth

reply to post by Metallicus


I don't think military service career is the place for any human that is interested in not killing other people without need.

When troops cross the border up from Mexico while invading the US, I will become G.I. Joe. Until then, it is immoral.

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
reply to post by Metallicus

 

I don't think military service career is the place for any human that is interested in not killing other people without need.

When troops cross the border up from Mexico while invading the US, I will become G.I. Joe. Until then, it is immoral.

Wise words for sure.

I guess my concerns are more geared towards military efficiency. Discussions of the current direction of our military could take up another thread of its own.

Originally posted by Metallicus

The US military is no place for gay men questioning their gender

Seeking a lower sentence, Manning's defence team argued his senior officers missed a number of "red flags" that should have led them to revoking the young soldier's security clearance. Much of his psychological instability stemmed from the military's harsh treatment of those who do not conform to the mainstream. As a gay man, who additionally was struggling with gender identity disorder, Manning felt ostracised. The evidence presented in court made it seem at least plausible that, with proper support and care, he might never have turned against the army.

I don't believe military service is a career for those who are having issues with their sexuality nor is it a place where political correctness should be embraced. While I fully support LGBT people having the same legal rights as any other American citizen, I still question the wisdom of removing the Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy.

Ultimately our military must be able to function at peak efficiency at all times and the men and women of our armed forces must be able to complete complex tasks and critical missions in the face of great danger. The US Army should not be in the business of making people 'more comfortable'. The resources of our armed forces are there to defend our nation, not to deal with complex social issues and the identity crisis of its soldiers.

I feel that Bradley Manning was dealing with a number of mental health issues that should have red flagged his security clearance and the US could have avoided much of the ensuing embarrassment.

PVT Manning is now Chelsea

U.S. Military No Place for Men to Question Their Gender

American Hero Now Gay Hero

Are you serious???

I don't believe military service is a career for those who are having issues with their sexuality

I assume this wouldnt matter, unless the newest mission of war is to sleep with the same sex. Then I am sure all political correctness would go out the window, and everyone would be for the "homosexuals" to get their "butts" right back into the war.

Ultimately our military must be able to function at peak efficiency at all times and the men and women of our armed forces must be able to complete complex tasks and critical missions in the face of great danger.

Do you mean like the guy that just got sentenced to life because he was massacring innocent women and children?
www.nytimes.com...

The US Army should not be in the business of making people 'more comfortable'. The resources of our armed forces are there to defend our nation, not to deal with complex social issues and the identity crisis of its soldiers.

Oh do you mean comfortable, the way that women are made to feel comfortable?

1 in 3 Women Get Raped in The Military


Maybe you should be looking at the whole picture, then being concerned with one person, and how the MSM told you , you should feel about it.

Peace, NRE.

it matters not who you are or who you care about but when you stick your hand in a pile of goo that was once your best friends friends face you'll know what to do

reply to post by Metallicus


I don't believe I follow your logic.

If we should reinstate DADT, then doesn't that negate having qualms over anyone's mental stability regarding their LGBT status?

What I'm saying is, if you believe we shouldn't allow LGBT in the military because you believe they have mental issues as a result, wouldn't reinstating DADT be moot?

Rather it would be more logical if you suggested that we make sure DADT is never reinstated so that we can bar all LGBT from the military, which is something I would have a serious problem with.

reply to post by Metallicus


Wow... thats great. They are profiling people who tell the people what thier government are up to now. I am sure I remember a time when such profiles were only formulated for terrorists and serial killers. A better time.

I personally do not think that mannings sexuality is the issue. You can feel ostracised by an organisation wether you are straight, gay, lesbian, bisexual, or even asexual (dont laugh. It takes all sorts to make the planet keep turning). What is important here is not wether he felt ostracised or why, but what he chose to do about it. I personally think that unless manning comes out and officially says "I ONLY revealed what I did, because I wanted to be a lady, and they wouldnt allow me to wear a wig a heels to the office." that this part of the issue ought to be placed where it belongs.

That is, in the file marked "Interesting, but ultimately not really related to the issue in any way what so ever".

Originally posted by NoRegretsEver

The US Army should not be in the business of making people 'more comfortable'. The resources of our armed forces are there to defend our nation, not to deal with complex social issues and the identity crisis of its soldiers.

Oh do you mean comfortable, the way that women are made to feel comfortable?

1 in 3 Women Get Raped in The Military

I think the OP is another argument to exclude certain classes of people from an institution because of those who have an issue with it. It's punishing the people who have hate and violence directed toward them, rather than those spreading the hate and committing the violence.

Don't want to be ridiculed and abused for being gay or a woman in the military? Don't join the military. The logic baffles and disappoints me.

Kind of like: Don't dress like that if you don't want to get raped.

Don't tell me how to dress. Tell him not to rape.

How is revealing WAR CRIMES "turning against the Army"?

lol.

Historically, some of the most effective killing machines have been armies of homosexual and/or bi-sexual men.

Who do you think the guy that conquered the entirety of the known world and named every single city in it Alexandria was?

This is seen all through the classical period where gender roles across many cultures for entertainment purposes were often quite blurry.

In some cultures, you weren't really a man unless you could take it like a man from a man, and give it back in turn. How much more manly that that can you get!?

Ah, and then we had the multiculural amalgamation of Rome with all its sundry customs and entertainments adopted and assimilated from everywhere the Empire stepped its toes.

reply to post by Druscilla

In some cultures, you weren't really a man unless you could take it like a man from a man, and give it back in turn. How much more manly that that can you get!?

I have seen write this before in gender discussion themes. Are you an advocate for all men testing their manhood this way?

And how does a woman conversely become more womanly??

Lets hear it genius.

Originally posted by Druscilla
In some cultures, you weren't really a man unless you could take it like a man from a man, and give it back in turn. How much more manly that that can you get!?

edit on 23-8-2013 by Druscilla because: (no reason given)

Um...yeah no, I'm all good! I feel manly enough just grilling a steak, thank you!

reply to post by Metallicus


First, gay people don't have "issues" with their sexuality. Second, his orientation didn't make him do what he did.

If being gay made him do this, then I think we should only have gay dudes in the military.

Originally posted by AthlonSavage
reply to post by Druscilla

 

In some cultures, you weren't really a man unless you could take it like a man from a man, and give it back in turn. How much more manly that that can you get!?

I have seen write this before in gender discussion themes. Are you an advocate for all men testing their manhood this way?

And how does a woman conversely become more womanly??

Lets hear it genius.

edit on 23-8-2013 by AthlonSavage because: (no reason given)

I dunno. Maybe if she were to make out with Kim Kardashian, while one held a beer and the remote, and the other a pizza and the xbox controller?

Im spitballin' here.....

While I don't necessarily agree with your overall premise, I think this point is valid:

I feel that Bradley Manning was dealing with a number of mental health issues that should have red flagged his security clearance and the US could have avoided much of the ensuing embarrassment.

I can agree that this may have been the case. But it should be the goal of the armed forces to weed-out everyone, regardless of sexual preference/desires, that may have some sort of mental instability or illness.

As other have pointed out, your approach assumes that there is something inherintly "wrong" with gays and such...and that it just not the case.

On the other hand, I would have a huge problem if the military covered hormone treatments as part of their policy. I also don't believe prisons should either.

In fact, this entire manning thing kinda torques me off. Not that he wants to be a chica....but just the way he is going about it and some of his lawyers comments.

Let them fight..I aint fighting.

Sexual orientation has nothing to do with what kind of soldier a person will or will not be. Military service in this country is often an economic choice made because an individual wishes to better themselves and cannot afford college. It is also the choice of a patriot regardless of economics. Neither of those reasons have a thing in the world to do with sex.

Sexual orientation does not determine personality, values, abilities.

reply to post by Metallicus


Uh-huh, because hetero sexuals obviously are immune to having " issues with their sexuality", am i rite?

Googling rape culture army will give you about 27 million results.

I feel that Bradley Manning was dealing with a number of mental health issues that should have red flagged his security clearance and the US could have avoided much of the ensuing embarrassment.

While personally I appreciate his revelations I can totally agree with that part of your post.

Is Bradley Manning an Example of Why LGBT People Should Not Serve?

No. The behavior of one person in a subset doesn't necessarily mean that all people in that subset behave that way.