Alex Blaze

Real men

Filed By Alex Blaze | May 04, 2010 12:00 PM | comments

Filed in: Politics
Tags: Don't Ask Don't Tell, military, randy smith, ron kirkland, violence

We wouldn't want to let gays and lesbians in the military come out, because that would make the military all that much less manly. It's the military culture, you see, that has to be protected or else we won't be able to keep on killing Iraqis. And what better way for men in a homosocial environment to prove their masculinity than to beat up fags?

The question, like many others at Thursday night's [Republican House candidate forum], was strongly worded, at one point charging the gay lifestyle is extremely medically destructive and that a "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" repeal would cause the federal government to spend more on health care as a result -- then asking the candidates how they felt about a repeal.

[Ron] Kirkland, a Jackson physician, referring to his training while serving in the Vietnam War era, told the crowd: "I can tell you if there were any homosexuals in that group, they were taken care of in ways I can't describe to you."

[Randy] Smith, a chef from Mercer and a Gulf War veteran, responded: "I definitely wouldn't want to share a shower with a homosexual. We took care of that kind of stuff, just like (Kirkland) said."

Kirkland took the coward's way out and said it was a joke when asked by a journalist:

I caught up with Kirkland after the event and asked him about his comment, noting that it could be interpreted as him condoning violence against gays. "It's a joke," he initially said about his comment during the forum, then went on to talk about why he thinks the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy exists and is needed.

Isn't that just special? He gets to pretend to be a big, manly gay basher in front of homophobic voters, but when word gets out to normal human beings the "just kidding!" explanation will be attached to it. There's a man who'll stand by his words.

Smith's explanation is just gibberish:

Smith said after the forum that he has friends who were quietly gay while serving in the military, and that he was primarily concerned about increased hazing and violence perpetuated by a "bad element" that he thinks could come with a repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell."

Of course, accusing either of these upstanding citizens of being homophobic would just be out of line. They have traditional values that tell them they have to take care of certain things. It's not like they hate gays or anything; sometimes you've just got to beat up a fag.

And these are the same people who cry foul if any sort of anti-violence law specifically mentions LGBT people, saying that those laws shouldn't cater to a minority, all bullying and violence is bad no matter who the victim is, yada yada yada. But get them when they think they aren't in mixed company and they'll start to list the people it's OK to beat up.


Recent Entries Filed under Politics:

Leave a comment

We want to know your opinion on this issue! While arguing about an opinion or idea is encouraged, personal attacks will not be tolerated. Please be respectful of others.

The editorial team will delete a comment that is off-topic, abusive, exceptionally incoherent, includes a slur or is soliciting and/or advertising. Repeated violations of the policy will result in revocation of your user account. Please keep in mind that this is our online home; ill-mannered house guests will be shown the door.


Alex what should be pointed out in the call for open service is that the forefathers placed a responsibilty on all Americans to be soldiers.Thomas Jefferson is quoted as saying "Every citizen should be a soldier.This was the case with the Greeks and the Romans and must be part of every free state." There are lots of other quotes by the forefathers calling for every American to protect and serve the Constitution.Both the Greek and Roman armies that Jefferson used as role models had open homosexuality yet it didn't deter Jefferson from referencing them.Some people have a problem with the values this country was founded on but if they were to read the Constitution and get to learn a little about the forefathers they would learn that most if not all they said still bares relevence today.For the most part the forefathers were open minded and forward thinking.

Alex, one of the most manly of manly parts of the military has to be submarines. In the 110 years of existence, women didn't serve on board submarines. It was too manly to have women in such close quarters.

The quarters are not so close these days on the big nuclear boats and the Secretary of the Navy and the Chief of Naval Operations are about to let women serve on submarines. The old manly submariners are not happy about this. I'm waiting to hear their responses once DADT gets repealed.

There were female civilian defence personnel on board Australian subs as far back as the RIMPAC exercise in 1988. They've been on board US subs too.

Many allied navies have such crews. It's no big deal. Just like having gays in the military is no big deal. Or blacks in the military is no big deal.

So if he knew closeted gay men in the military and says they "took care of" those guys, does that mean he gay bashed them?