The Majority of Military Sexual Assault Victims Are Men. ( How could Danno have been so right?)

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

This is one reason I would never advise a daughter to go in the Military, if it is this bad with men on men, you can imagine the target Women have on their backs.

You don't have to imagine it, Danno. You just need to read what you posted when you started this thread - you apparently still haven't - and you'd know just how bad it is for women.

[Penny Lane 8,159]

"We had one chick, but she wasn't hot, so nobody raped her or anything."

[We Keep Receipts 9,238]

Two things:

The picture and the article aren't even linked together. The picture in the original link would have done just fine. You're being called out because you're trying to tie gay men to rape.

Just admit your mistake and move on to the next topic.

You've served in the Corps, I remember you bringing this up a while ago. Is it possible that something happened while you were serving, and this is why you have such a disdain for it?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

"We had one chick, but she wasn't hot, so nobody raped her or anything."

Yeah, now if she looked like a swimsuit model...

Unfuckinbelievable.

[We Keep Receipts 9,238]

You might get him excited...

Ouch, you're right, need to work on my word structure...

[Danno 1,228]

It shows that likewise, what you REALLY, REALLY can['t handle is the possibility that Gay men attack at the same rate as anyone else.

IF you believe that to be true, why not post the data you used to make that conclusion.

"We had one chick, but she wasn't hot, so nobody raped her or anything."

LOL now that was funny..... though it came close to breaking the TOS.

[Penny Lane 8,159]

LOL now that was funny..... though it came close to breaking the TOS.

How so?

It's essentially what you said. I just used harsher words.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I think anti-gay bigotry (such as the premise you are floating in this thread) is definitely breaking the TOS, but let's not worry about that ;-)

[Danno 1,228]

Danno, admit it. The two men in this photo have nothing to do with your post other than they are gay and are in the military.

Well no SH_t.

The Gay lobby spends a lot of energy making sure Gays are used in random advertising, news stories etc.

Danno tries to get on board and you wet your pants.

Sheez

Anyway I have to go meet a client, so I will leave it with you.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Will you be showing the picture to your client?

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

I think anti-gay bigotry (such as the premise you are floating in this thread) is definitely breaking the TOS, but let's not worry about that ;-)

No, we would not worry about that. Bigotry is cool.

[JohnR! 5,495]

According to a search, this is the website where the pic was taken from and the story to go with it.

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/50-years-huge-strides-gay-rights-movement-0

Go back 50 years in time.

Homosexuality was deemed a mental disorder by the nation's psychiatric authorities, and gay sex was a crime in every state but Illinois. Federal workers could be fired merely for being gay.

Today, gays serve openly in the military, work as TV news anchors and federal judges, win elections as big-city mayors and members of Congress. Popular TV shows have gay protagonists.

And now the gay-rights movement may be on the cusp of momentous legal breakthroughs. Later this month, a Supreme Court ruling could lead to legalization of same-sex marriage in California, and there's a good chance the court will require the federal government to recognize same-sex marriages in all U.S. jurisdictions where they are legal — as of now, 12 states and Washington, D.C.

The transition over five decades has been far from smooth — replete with bitter protests, anti-gay violence, backlashes that inflicted many political setbacks. Unlike the civil rights movement and the women's liberation movement, the campaign for gay rights unfolded without household-name leaders.

Progress came about largely due to the individual choices of countless gays and lesbians to come out of the closet and get engaged.

These were people like a Chicago graduate student willing to confront a high-profile critic of gay relationships. A young community organizer plunging into advocacy work for AIDS victims. Three gay couples in Hawaii suing for the right to marry at a time when that seemed far-fetched even to many activists.

"It is pretty mind-blowing how quickly it's moved," said David Eisenbach, who teaches political history at Columbia University and has written about the gay-rights movement.

"There are kids coming out in high school now, being accepted by their classmates," Eisenbach said. "Parents, relatives, friends are seeing the people they love come out. It's very hard to discriminate against someone you love."

As the Supreme Court rulings approach, here is a look back at three of the gay-rights movement's pivotal phases and some of the people who chose to get involved.

___(equals)

INTO THE STREETS

Dr. David Reuben had many fans after publishing his best-selling "Everything You Always Wanted to Know About Sex" in 1969. Murray Edelman wasn't among them.

Edelman, then a University of Chicago graduate student, was part of a tiny band of activists who launched a gay liberation movement in the city late in 1969.

When Reuben — who depicted gay men's relationships as bleakly impersonal and short-lived — was booked to appear on a TV talk show in Chicago in January 1971, Edelman and some fellow activists decided to attend.

Irked at being denied a chance to ask questions, Edelman headed to the stage toward the end of the session, seeking to confront Reuben. He was hauled out of the studio, but the incident received TV and newspaper coverage.

"It was the first time they really acknowledged there were gay activists in the city," Edelman said.

It was an era abounding with firsts for the gay-rights movement.

Historians can trace its roots back to individuals and incidents many decades earlier, and some pioneering national gay-rights organizations were formed in the 1950s.

But the pace picked up in the 1960s — which saw the first gay-rights protest in front of the White House and, in 1969, a U.S. Court of Appeals ruling that federal civil servants could no longer be fired solely because they were gay.

Gay activists formed organizations in New York, San Francisco and elsewhere. Amid the ferment of the anti-war movement and civil rights movement, there was a surge of interest in gay liberation — gays and lesbians publicly revealing their sexuality and evoking it as a source of pride, not shame.

The movement broadened — and public awareness grew — after police harassment of patrons at the Stonewall Inn, a New York City gay bar, sparked three days of riots in June 1969.

Emboldened by Stonewall, Edelman decided to promote gay activism at the University of Chicago. Through an ad in the student newspaper, he and friend convened a meeting to launch a gay liberation group. It started with a handful of members and grew steadily,

"We came to the conclusion that, before we could do anything else, we had to come out," Edelman said. "We decided to wear buttons — 'Out of the closets, into the streets.'"

By the summer of 1970, the activists had hosted some well-attended public dances and organized Chicago's first gay pride parade.

Edelman, now 69, went on to work for CBS News and serve as editorial director for Voter News Service, the consortium that conducted exit polling during several presidential elections.

What did he and his colleagues accomplish four decades ago?

"It was a whole new consciousness for gays — we made it OK to be gay," he said. "We thought that we had strength in each other, that we could define ourselves differently from how society defined us."

___(equals)

COPING WITH CRISIS

The 1970s brought a rush of milestones as gays came out of the closet and started demanding equal rights — the first openly gay people elected to public office, the first local laws prohibiting anti-gay discrimination, the first national gay rights march in Washington. In 1973, the American Psychiatric Association declassified homosexuality as a mental disorder.

With those winds of change at his back, 27-year-old Tim Sweeney moved to New York in the fall of 1981 to become executive director of the Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund, a gay legal advocacy group.

A few months earlier, The New York Times had published an article headlined "Rare Cancer Seen in 41 Homosexuals." Sweeney worried this mysterious illness would give the public another excuse to denigrate gay people at a time when he and his colleagues were feeling hopeful.

He couldn't have conceived of the pain, losses and political challenges that lay ahead.

It would be a year before the cluster of strange ailments afflicting not only gay men, but intravenous drug users, hemophiliacs and some women would have a name — Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome, or AIDS — and another year before the virus that caused it, HIV, was isolated.

Sweeney had come to Lambda Legal planning to oversee challenges to state laws that criminalized gay sexual activity, to represent people fired from jobs because they were gay. That work continued early in the epidemic while volunteers and community clinics cared for the growing numbers of terminally ill.

Soon, though, the scourge became all-encompassing.

In 1983, Lambda took on the case of a doctor being evicted from his rented Manhattan office because he treated people with AIDS. A court blocked the eviction, ruling that it violated state laws protecting the disabled; the decision provided a template for securing insurance coverage for the afflicted. As panic and prejudice spread, gay lawyers also sought to protect the confidentiality of patients being tested or treated for AIDS.

The epidemic made gay people more visible than ever and spotlighted the absence of legal protections for their relationships. Survivors who cared for longtime partners found themselves barred from hospital rooms, frozen out of funerals, stripped of shared possessions. Without marriage as an option, couples prepared wills and even tried to adopt one another so their relationships would be respected in the event of death.

And death loomed terrifyingly. By the end of 1985, 15,527 cases of AIDS had been reported in the U.S. and 12,529 deaths attributed to the disease.

But President Ronald Reagan still had not uttered the word "AIDS" publicly and the government had not devised a plan for combatting the disease.

Seeking to intensify pressure on federal officials to invest in a national response, Sweeney became public policy director and eventually executive director of the New York-based Gay Men's Health Crisis, the nation's first AIDS service organization.

It was a huge operation, with 235 staff and 4,000 volunteers feeding, counseling and advocating for people with AIDS. The group, and similar organizations in other cities, also promoted "safe sex" messages that later would be credited with slowing infection rates.

Reflecting the gay community's growing anger over the slow government response, Sweeney also participated in the launch of ACT UP, which used protests and civil disobedience to bring urgency to the cause of developing effective drugs.

"We were losing in those days dozens and dozens of clients at GMHC every single month. We had staff who died. We had board members who died ... It was a very dark period," he said. "We somehow took that incredible loss and fury we all felt about how dispensable certain people in this society thought we all were and forced change in the system."

By mid-1993 Sweeney had left Gay Men's Health Crisis to care for his older brother, who would die of AIDS the next year. The deaths still were mounting, but federal engagement had gradually increased. President Bill Clinton established an AIDS policy office in the White House, and Congress passed legislation protecting people with AIDS from discrimination. The pace of federally funded research picked up.

In 1996, as drugs emerged that would eventually change AIDS from a death sentence to a somewhat manageable disease, Sweeney returned to full-time activism with the Empire State Pride Agenda, a group that later would help legalize same-sex marriage in New York. Since 2007, he has led the Gill Foundation, a major financial supporter of gay-rights causes.

For Sweeney, there's no doubt that AIDS hastened the gay-rights movement's growth by shining a light on inequality and mobilizing the gay community.

"When they saw how much we cared, how much we organized and reached across every barrier, whether it was race or gender or neighborhood or class ... the fact that we showed that kind of heart and innovation and courage in spite of what was just relentless stigma and dehumanization, I think that really changed the country's sense of who were as human beings," he said.

___(equals)

THEN COMES MARRIAGE

The three gay couples didn't even have an attorney, let alone an inkling of the weighty consequences, when they arrived at Hawaii's Health Department on Dec. 17, 1990, to apply for marriage licenses.

Indeed, one couple, Ninia Baehr and Genora Dancel, had met only six months earlier. They'd fallen in love; Dancel had already bought Baehr a ring.

"For us, it wasn't part of long-term strategy," Baehr said in a recent interview. "It was the emotional part of wanting that respect, and wanting the protections of things like health coverage."

The couples' applications were rejected — unsurprising given that same-sex marriage was legal in no state or nation — and their plan to file a lawsuit floundered when major gay-rights groups turned down the case.

Eventually, a lawyer in private practice took the case, which dragged on for five years while a backlash materialized. Hawaii lawmakers voted in 1994 to limit marriage to unions between a man and woman, and in September 1996 Congress passed the Defense of Marriage Act, which prohibited federal recognition of same-sex marriages and said no state could be forced to recognize such marriages that might become legal in another state.

In December 1996, the three couples and their legal team — reinforced by New York-based gay-rights lawyer Evan Wolfson — won the first-ever judgment ordering a state to legalize same-sex marriage. Circuit Judge Kevin Chang said Hawaii failed to provide sound reasons for banning such marriages, and rejected the claim that same-sex couples are less fit to raise children than heterosexuals.

The victory was short-lived. Chang suspended his ruling to allow an appeal, and in 1998 it was rendered moot when Hawaii voters approved a constitutional amendment giving state legislators the power to limit marriage to heterosexual unions. Over the next two decades, 30 other states passed amendments banning gay marriage — including California with a ballot measure that's been challenged in one of the cases now before the Supreme Court.

Despite the setbacks, the campaign for marriage equality grew inexorably from a quixotic cause to a broad mass movement now supported, according to many polls, by a majority of Americans.

Under a court order, same-sex marriage began in Massachusetts in 2004. Soon legislators and voters in other states were legalizing it without court pressure. With the addition of Rhode Island, Delaware and Minnesota in May, there are now 12 gay-marriage states.

Wolfson is now president of Freedom to Marry, an advocacy group that has played a key role in the movement.

The Hawaii case, Wolfson says, "was the real turning point."

"It was the first time in the history of the world that the government was forced to come before a trial judge and show a reason for excluding gay people from marriage," Wolfson said. "We were able to show that the government doesn't have one."

Tens of thousands of American gays are now legally married, though none of the Hawaii couples who filed the suit are among them.

Baehr and Dancel broke up not long after Chang's 1996 ruling, though they stay in touch.

"Being part of that case, and such a public face of it, brought us closer," Baehr said. "But it also placed a lot of stress on us."

Baehr, who works for the American Civil Liberties Union in Montana, believes same-sex marriage will eventually prevail nationwide. Short term, she hopes the Supreme Court will order federal recognition of the same-sex marriages that exist now, striking down a key part of the Defense of Marriage Act that surfaced as a backlash to the Hawaii lawsuit.

"We've had that feeling like DOMA is our responsibility — it was a bad thing that happened in part because of what we'd done," Baehr said. "To see it made right, two decades later, is going to be very sweet."

The Gay lobby spends a lot of energy making sure Gays are used in random advertising, news stories etc.

[Pooky 3,784]

Who said implying someone is gay is an insult? It's only insulting if you find something wrong with being homosexual, no?

If the poster using those words believes the intended recipient to be homophobic, the only logical conclusion to the impartial observer is that there is intent to insult.

[We Keep Receipts 9,238]

If the poster using those words believes the intended recipient to be homophobic, the only logical conclusion to the impartial observer is that there is intent to insult.

I think the implication was, you fear what you secretly desire. Danno is obsessed with homosexuality to the point it does raise the question.

What's even worse, the artilce clearly says the rapes that involved men on men, those men identified as heterosexual.

Rape isn't about sex, it's about power and abuse. To imply that gay men are more likely to rape men is a bigoted and hateful.

Edited January 3, 2014 by Su and Marvin

[JohnR! 5,495]

If the poster using those words believes the intended recipient to be homophobic, the only logical conclusion to the impartial observer is that there is intent to insult.

Not necessarily. One can always point something which seems obvious as a sheer observation, without meaning it as an insult. Not everything is a judgment call.