CGS Opens Diversity Conference

Legs

ADC
Book Reviewer
#1
Army's top general makes history by addressing conference on homosexuality

The head of the British Army has made military history by addressing a conference on homosexuality, The Sunday Telegraph can reveal.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/new...y-addressing-conference-on-homosexuality.html


As a member of the Army LGBT forum I was honoured to meet the CGS and speak at this conference. The Army (and the Forces as a whole) have changed dramatically over the last few years, and this is one aspect of the change that is positive.

Anyone can be proud to serve his or her country, and it doesn't matter what your gender or sexuality, nor the colour of your skin, or the type of religion you practice we all have a place in todays Army (or RN or RAF....) - shame about the photo which makes CGS look rather...er... camp!
 

B_AND_T

MIA
Book Reviewer
#2
He's trying to blend in!
 
#3
Legs said:
The Army (and the Forces as a whole) have changed dramatically over the last few years, and this is one aspect of the change that is positive.

Anyone can be proud to serve his or her country, and it doesn't matter what your gender or sexuality, nor the colour of your skin, or the type of religion you practice we all have a place in todays Army
Very true, attitudes have changed an awful lot, it is almost unthinkable that less than 10 years ago we refused to employ people on the grounds of homosexuality. There are a few dinosaurs around who remain bigotted (as there are in society as a whole) but their numbers are decreasing.

This increased acceptance of peoples differences is perhaps the single most positive change of the decade.
 
#4
Priceless:

 

ugly

LE
Moderator
#6
Well Bu&&er me rigid whats the army coming too?
 
#7
Unlucky_Alf said:
Legs said:
The Army (and the Forces as a whole) have changed dramatically over the last few years, and this is one aspect of the change that is positive.

Anyone can be proud to serve his or her country, and it doesn't matter what your gender or sexuality, nor the colour of your skin, or the type of religion you practice we all have a place in todays Army
Very true, attitudes have changed an awful lot, it is almost unthinkable that less than 10 years ago we refused to employ people on the grounds of homosexuality. There are a few dinosaurs around who remain bigotted (as there are in society as a whole) but their numbers are decreasing.

This increased acceptance of peoples differences is perhaps the single most positive change of the decade.
Where do you stop though? There are some differences that should not be accepted yet they are at present in almost exactly the same position as gays were 20-30 years ago.

Does this mean that in 20 years time we will see the then boss doing the opening speach at the kiddyfiddlers/necrophilicas/scatologists annual general meeting?

IMO This may turn out to be the thin end of the wedge which the military will come to rue.
 
#8
Steven said:
Unlucky_Alf said:
Legs said:
The Army (and the Forces as a whole) have changed dramatically over the last few years, and this is one aspect of the change that is positive.

Anyone can be proud to serve his or her country, and it doesn't matter what your gender or sexuality, nor the colour of your skin, or the type of religion you practice we all have a place in todays Army
Very true, attitudes have changed an awful lot, it is almost unthinkable that less than 10 years ago we refused to employ people on the grounds of homosexuality. There are a few dinosaurs around who remain bigotted (as there are in society as a whole) but their numbers are decreasing.

This increased acceptance of peoples differences is perhaps the single most positive change of the decade.
Where do you stop though? There are some differences that should not be accepted yet they are at present in almost exactly the same position as gays were 20-30 years ago.

Does this mean that in 20 years time we will see the then boss doing the opening speach at the kiddyfiddlers/necrophilicas/scatologists annual general meeting?

IMO This may turn out to be the thin end of the wedge which the military will come to rue.
I think the big difference is that the law of the land says that it's perfectly ok to be a flamboyant dresser or to go from man to Mandy. It's a bit of a stretch to say that we'll be recruiting the Glitters soon.

In these time of manpower stretch and the considering the eternal problem of recruiting can we really afford to turn our backs on whatever the percentage of the population homosexualists and the like make up?

In any case I strongly suspect that the percentage of gays, bi's and trannies in the Armed Forces hasn't changed one bit from what it was fifty odd years ago. The only difference now is that we don't criminalise these people.

Edited to add If this is a wah I knew it all along.
 

cpunk

LE
Moderator
#9
Steven said:
Does this mean that in 20 years time we will see the then boss doing the opening speach at the kiddyfiddlers/necrophilicas/scatologists annual general meeting?

IMO This may turn out to be the thin end of the wedge which the military will come to rue.
In the event that paedophilia and necrophilia are legalised and become accepted by society, then no doubt the army will have to learn to embrace it, though it strikes me as somewhat unlikely. As far as I'm aware, 'scat' is legal now though my guess is that most practitioners keep fairly schtumm about it.

The fact is that homosexuality has been part of military life since the dawn of time, and what happens in bed between consenting adults has little or no effect on military efficiency, under most circumstances. Problems do arise because of sexual relationships in the military, but in my experience the problem is caused by the sexual relationship itself, and whether it's homosexual or heterosexual is usually immaterial.
 
#10
Steven said:
Unlucky_Alf said:
Legs said:
The Army (and the Forces as a whole) have changed dramatically over the last few years, and this is one aspect of the change that is positive.

Anyone can be proud to serve his or her country, and it doesn't matter what your gender or sexuality, nor the colour of your skin, or the type of religion you practice we all have a place in todays Army
Very true, attitudes have changed an awful lot, it is almost unthinkable that less than 10 years ago we refused to employ people on the grounds of homosexuality. There are a few dinosaurs around who remain bigotted (as there are in society as a whole) but their numbers are decreasing.

This increased acceptance of peoples differences is perhaps the single most positive change of the decade.
Where do you stop though? There are some differences that should not be accepted yet they are at present in almost exactly the same position as gays were 20-30 years ago.

Does this mean that in 20 years time we will see the then boss doing the opening speach at the kiddyfiddlers/necrophilicas/scatologists annual general meeting?

IMO This may turn out to be the thin end of the wedge which the military will come to rue.
Rubbish, that is ridiculous sensationalism - there is a huge difference between homosexuality and necrophilia and to use that argument is outrageous.

Are you seriously arguing that we should encourage the marginalisation a large section of society who could potentially do a good job in the forces because they are gay because it is the 'thin end of the wedge', leading to an Army of necrophilia?

If you are sir, then take yourself outside, give yourself a hearty talking to, and come back later.
 
#11
codename1157 said:
Steven said:
Unlucky_Alf said:
Legs said:
The Army (and the Forces as a whole) have changed dramatically over the last few years, and this is one aspect of the change that is positive.

Anyone can be proud to serve his or her country, and it doesn't matter what your gender or sexuality, nor the colour of your skin, or the type of religion you practice we all have a place in todays Army
Very true, attitudes have changed an awful lot, it is almost unthinkable that less than 10 years ago we refused to employ people on the grounds of homosexuality. There are a few dinosaurs around who remain bigotted (as there are in society as a whole) but their numbers are decreasing.

This increased acceptance of peoples differences is perhaps the single most positive change of the decade.
Where do you stop though? There are some differences that should not be accepted yet they are at present in almost exactly the same position as gays were 20-30 years ago.

Does this mean that in 20 years time we will see the then boss doing the opening speach at the kiddyfiddlers/necrophilicas/scatologists annual general meeting?

IMO This may turn out to be the thin end of the wedge which the military will come to rue.
I think the big difference is that the law of the land says that it's perfectly ok to be a flamboyant dresser or to go from man to Mandy. It's a bit of a stretch to say that we'll be recruiting the Glitters soon.

The law of the land used to say that being "musical" wasn't allowed and all normal people should detest them, much the same as now for the other groups. You think it will never change?

In these time of manpower stretch and the considering the eternal problem of recruiting can we really afford to turn our backs on whatever the percentage of the population homosexualists and the like make up?

If recruiting is that bad that the only solution is that you have to encourage deviants then you have bigger problems to worry about.


In any case I strongly suspect that the percentage of gays, bi's and trannies in the Armed Forces hasn't changed one bit from what it was fifty odd years ago. The only difference now is that we don't criminalise these people.
You are very probably right on the numbers but it is not the point, there are probably the same number of other "differently aligned" people as well but does that make it right?
 
#12
Unlucky_Alf said:
Steven said:
Unlucky_Alf said:
Legs said:
The Army (and the Forces as a whole) have changed dramatically over the last few years, and this is one aspect of the change that is positive.

Anyone can be proud to serve his or her country, and it doesn't matter what your gender or sexuality, nor the colour of your skin, or the type of religion you practice we all have a place in todays Army
Very true, attitudes have changed an awful lot, it is almost unthinkable that less than 10 years ago we refused to employ people on the grounds of homosexuality. There are a few dinosaurs around who remain bigotted (as there are in society as a whole) but their numbers are decreasing.

This increased acceptance of peoples differences is perhaps the single most positive change of the decade.
Where do you stop though? There are some differences that should not be accepted yet they are at present in almost exactly the same position as gays were 20-30 years ago.

Does this mean that in 20 years time we will see the then boss doing the opening speach at the kiddyfiddlers/necrophilicas/scatologists annual general meeting?

IMO This may turn out to be the thin end of the wedge which the military will come to rue.
Rubbish, that is ridiculous sensationalism - there is a huge difference between homosexuality and necrophilia and to use that argument is outrageous.

Are you seriously arguing that we should encourage the marginalisation a large section of society who could potentially do a good job in the forces because they are gay because it is the 'thin end of the wedge', leading to an Army of necrophilia?

If you are sir, then take yourself outside, give yourself a hearty talking to, and come back later.
I am saying that having changed the law once to allow or even encourage one form of sexual identification then whats to stop the same thing happening for those who are now seen as perverts, much as gays where a few years ago.

Lets not forget that in some parts of the world all of what we would condemn are perfectly legal activities so why not allow them to join HMF and parade themselves proudly in the streets?
 
#14
Steven said:
Unlucky_Alf said:
Steven said:
Unlucky_Alf said:
Legs said:
The Army (and the Forces as a whole) have changed dramatically over the last few years, and this is one aspect of the change that is positive.

Anyone can be proud to serve his or her country, and it doesn't matter what your gender or sexuality, nor the colour of your skin, or the type of religion you practice we all have a place in todays Army
Very true, attitudes have changed an awful lot, it is almost unthinkable that less than 10 years ago we refused to employ people on the grounds of homosexuality. There are a few dinosaurs around who remain bigotted (as there are in society as a whole) but their numbers are decreasing.

This increased acceptance of peoples differences is perhaps the single most positive change of the decade.
Where do you stop though? There are some differences that should not be accepted yet they are at present in almost exactly the same position as gays were 20-30 years ago.

Does this mean that in 20 years time we will see the then boss doing the opening speach at the kiddyfiddlers/necrophilicas/scatologists annual general meeting?

IMO This may turn out to be the thin end of the wedge which the military will come to rue.
Rubbish, that is ridiculous sensationalism - there is a huge difference between homosexuality and necrophilia and to use that argument is outrageous.

Are you seriously arguing that we should encourage the marginalisation a large section of society who could potentially do a good job in the forces because they are gay because it is the 'thin end of the wedge', leading to an Army of necrophilia?

If you are sir, then take yourself outside, give yourself a hearty talking to, and come back later.
I am saying that having changed the law once to allow or even encourage one form of sexual identification then whats to stop the same thing happening for those who are now seen as perverts, much as gays where a few years ago.

Lets not forget that in some parts of the world all of what we would condemn are perfectly legal activities so why not allow them to join HMF and parade themselves proudly in the streets?
Steven,

We are not talking about deviants, we are talking about homosexuals. I have to concur with cpunk on the point that it is not usually the sexuality of the individuals involved that causes the problem.

Yes, different things become acceptable over time and thus laws are amended and that happened with homosexuality. Do you really think that society is about to say that paedophilia and necrophilia are acceptable?

You are staggeringly out of kilter with the rest of society, the one we recruit from and the one to which we shall eventually return, you should really consider revisiting your views on this issue.
 
#15
cpunk said:
Steven said:
Does this mean that in 20 years time we will see the then boss doing the opening speach at the kiddyfiddlers/necrophilicas/scatologists annual general meeting?

IMO This may turn out to be the thin end of the wedge which the military will come to rue.
In the event that paedophilia and necrophilia are legalised and become accepted by society, then no doubt the army will have to learn to embrace it, though it strikes me as somewhat unlikely. As far as I'm aware, 'scat' is legal now though my guess is that most practitioners keep fairly schtumm about it.

The fact is that homosexuality has been part of military life since the dawn of time, and what happens in bed between consenting adults has little or no effect on military efficiency, under most circumstances. Problems do arise because of sexual relationships in the military, but in my experience the problem is caused by the sexual relationship itself, and whether it's homosexual or heterosexual is usually immaterial.
Just because it is made legal doesn't make it right.

Difficult point to defend without going into slavery, Nazis, religion and the like but I hope you get the point.

Our forebearers* wouldn't recognise or accept the forces as they are now but we in our wisdom now say they were wrong.

*obviously the more flamboyent members might be fine with it.
 
#16
Steven said:
Unlucky_Alf said:
Steven said:
Unlucky_Alf said:
Legs said:
The Army (and the Forces as a whole) have changed dramatically over the last few years, and this is one aspect of the change that is positive.

Anyone can be proud to serve his or her country, and it doesn't matter what your gender or sexuality, nor the colour of your skin, or the type of religion you practice we all have a place in todays Army
Very true, attitudes have changed an awful lot, it is almost unthinkable that less than 10 years ago we refused to employ people on the grounds of homosexuality. There are a few dinosaurs around who remain bigotted (as there are in society as a whole) but their numbers are decreasing.

This increased acceptance of peoples differences is perhaps the single most positive change of the decade.
Where do you stop though? There are some differences that should not be accepted yet they are at present in almost exactly the same position as gays were 20-30 years ago.

Does this mean that in 20 years time we will see the then boss doing the opening speach at the kiddyfiddlers/necrophilicas/scatologists annual general meeting?

IMO This may turn out to be the thin end of the wedge which the military will come to rue.
Rubbish, that is ridiculous sensationalism - there is a huge difference between homosexuality and necrophilia and to use that argument is outrageous.

Are you seriously arguing that we should encourage the marginalisation a large section of society who could potentially do a good job in the forces because they are gay because it is the 'thin end of the wedge', leading to an Army of necrophilia?

If you are sir, then take yourself outside, give yourself a hearty talking to, and come back later.
I am saying that having changed the law once to allow or even encourage one form of sexual identification then whats to stop the same thing happening for those who are now seen as perverts, much as gays where a few years ago.

Lets not forget that in some parts of the world all of what we would condemn are perfectly legal activities so why not allow them to join HMF and parade themselves proudly in the streets?
Steven,

We are not talking about deviants, we are talking about homosexuals. I have to concur with cpunk on the point that it is not usually the sexuality of the individuals involved that causes the problem.

Yes, different things become acceptable over time and thus laws are amended and that happened with homosexuality. Do you really think that society is about to say that paedophilia and necrophilia are acceptable?

You are staggeringly out of kilter with the rest of society, the one we recruit from and the one to which we shall eventually return, you should really consider revisiting your views on this issue.
 
#17
Unlucky_Alf said:
Steven,

We are not talking about deviants, we are talking about homosexuals. I have to concur with cpunk on the point that it is not usually the sexuality of the individuals involved that causes the problem.

Yes, different things become acceptable over time and thus laws are amended and that happened with homosexuality. Do you really think that society is about to say that paedophilia and necrophilia are acceptable?

You are staggeringly out of kilter with the rest of society, the one we recruit from and the one to which we shall eventually return, you should really consider revisiting your views on this issue.
Up until very recently (in historical terms) homosexuals where exactly as deviant as pedophiles and the like.

See my post above about legal not necessarily being equal to right.

I have no need to "revisit my views". If the LBGT and associated types can get up and tell me they are normal and expect and require me to accept that then I have just as much right to say that they are wrong.
 
#18
I have no problems with homosexuals and they can go and do whatever they want to each other in the privacy of their own 'space'.

I'm not so sure that I'd be too keen on having to share a room though. I agree with 'live and let live' but why should their rights have to trample all over my feelings? It would be exactly the same as me sharing accommodation with women, I probably wouldn't mind but why would they have to put up with me?

Or is it a case of 'equality' being a one way street as normal?
 
#19
Plant-Pilot said:
I have no problems with homosexuals and they can go and do whatever they want to each other in the privacy of their own 'space'.

I'm not so sure that I'd be too keen on having to share a room though. I agree with 'live and let live' but why should their rights have to trample all over my feelings? It would be exactly the same as me sharing accommodation with women, I probably wouldn't mind but why would they have to put up with me?

Or is it a case of 'equality' being a one way street as normal?
The law of averages says you probably have already shared a room with one. It's just that thanks to people like Steven he had to hide it.

As for sharing the grots with women, that's be a disaster. I for one couldn't hold my stomach in all the time. :(
 

Legs

ADC
Book Reviewer
#20
Plant-Pilot said:
I have no problems with homosexuals and they can go and do whatever they want to each other in the privacy of their own 'space'.

I'm not so sure that I'd be too keen on having to share a room though. I agree with 'live and let live' but why should their rights have to trample all over my feelings? It would be exactly the same as me sharing accommodation with women, I probably wouldn't mind but why would they have to put up with me?

Or is it a case of 'equality' being a one way street as normal?
[My bold] How sure are you that you haven't? How sure are you that, just as you would cringe at watching gay porn, he wasn't inwardly cringing as you watched straight porn?

Even today there are many gay and lesbian soldiers who are not 'out' because they fear repercussions. Is it right that these soldiers should live in fear? Of course not.

Just because a gay guy shares a room with you doesn't mean he's going to slip under your covers one night whilst you're drunk.

Few of the gays at the conference were effeminate or camp in any way. You wouldn't even know with most of them unless they told you. Some folk need to move away from the 'he'd fancy me' or 'he'd mince around like a fairy' school of thought. That is just stereo-typing.

Some of the gay guys have been serving many years - long before the ban was lifted. They learned that to stay alive - or at least in the job they love - they had to blend in. Most do.

I've been asked 'Why do you have these conferences? What is your aim? What do you want to achieve?'

Simple. We want to acheive a state where it doesn't matter what sex you sleep with, or what gender you identify as. We want to acheive a state where the LGBT Conference and things like Pride are not required. Where everyone is happy with who they are and who they serve with.

I have also been asked 'Where is the Straight White Male Conference?' Well, if you're a straight white male and you feel the need for a Straight White Male conference. Set the bloody thing up and stop crying about it!
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads