# Gays OK in military but not homosexuals? WTF? **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [February 12, 2010, 3:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gays-ok-in-military-but-not-homosexuals-wtf/528718 "2010-02-12T15:59:15Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Rand\_Rover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/db5fbb/32.png) [@Rand\_Rover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rand_Rover)\ **Post date:** [February 13, 2010, 12:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gays-ok-in-military-but-not-homosexuals-wtf/528718/21 "2010-02-13T00:22:35Z")
Interesting how there was a bigger disparity among Democrats. I bet this aspect of this thread gets very little discussion here on the SDLDMB. ---
**Author:** ![woodstockbirdybird](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/woodstockbirdybird/32/7905_2.png) [@woodstockbirdybird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/woodstockbirdybird)\ **Post date:** [February 13, 2010, 12:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gays-ok-in-military-but-not-homosexuals-wtf/528718/22 "2010-02-13T00:41:37Z")
> [@Rand\_Rover](#): > > Interesting how there was a bigger disparity among Democrats. I bet this aspect of this thread gets very little discussion here on the SDLDMB. Except where it was mentioned in the OP, you mean? Anyway, I’m not sure the fact that more Republicans were against it no matter how it was worded is really something I’d want to brag about if I were you (which, thankfully, I’m not). ---
**Author:** ![Rand\_Rover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/db5fbb/32.png) [@Rand\_Rover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rand_Rover)\ **Post date:** [February 13, 2010, 1:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gays-ok-in-military-but-not-homosexuals-wtf/528718/23 "2010-02-13T01:08:06Z")
I’m well aware it was mentioned in the OP. I said it wouldn’t get much discussion, imnplying in posts fokkowing the OP (and mine). I am not a Republican. So, I’m not bragging about “my side.” So, you’re 0 for 2, bub. What else you got? ---
**Author:** ![Kozmik](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/8dc957/32.png) [@Kozmik](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kozmik)\ **Post date:** [February 13, 2010, 2:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gays-ok-in-military-but-not-homosexuals-wtf/528718/24 "2010-02-13T02:57:17Z")
> [@Slypork](#): > > Um, excuse me people. Gay men and lesbians = homosexuals. What the fuck is wrong with you that you can’t make the connection? As usual, _The Simpsons_ explains what’s wrong. Homer, John is a homo (yes..) sexual. AHHWAA!! ---
**Author:** ![elfkin477](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/a9a28c/32.png) [@elfkin477](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elfkin477)\ **Post date:** [February 13, 2010, 3:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gays-ok-in-military-but-not-homosexuals-wtf/528718/25 "2010-02-13T03:41:23Z")
> [@woodstockbirdybird](#): > > Except where it was mentioned in the OP, you mean? > > Anyway, I’m not sure the fact that more Republicans were against it no matter how it was worded is really something I’d want to brag about if I were you (which, thankfully, I’m not). Oh, all right, if you’re going to be disappointed if no one does it: ha ha, democrats have smaller vocabularies than republicans! Happy now? ---
**Author:** ![Scarlett67](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/scarlett67/32/7387_2.png) [@Scarlett67](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scarlett67)\ **Post date:** [February 13, 2010, 3:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gays-ok-in-military-but-not-homosexuals-wtf/528718/26 "2010-02-13T03:52:14Z")
> [@Giles](#): > > And I’d add: > Do you think that heterosexuals should be allowed to serve openly in the military? Don’t forget those filthy thespians and public masticators. ---
**Author:** ![DesertDog](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/desertdog/32/11503_2.png) [@DesertDog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DesertDog)\ **Post date:** [February 13, 2010, 4:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gays-ok-in-military-but-not-homosexuals-wtf/528718/27 "2010-02-13T04:11:35Z")
> [@ivan\_astikov](#): > > It’s those gay homosexuals that I don’t trust. But wouldn’t a gay homosexual be . . . straight? You know, like a double negative being a positive. ---
**Author:** ![Claude\_Remains](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/898d66/32.png) [@Claude\_Remains](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Claude_Remains)\ **Post date:** [February 13, 2010, 4:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gays-ok-in-military-but-not-homosexuals-wtf/528718/28 "2010-02-13T04:17:00Z")
I’m masticating like a motherfuck! ---
**Author:** ![Tim\_T-Bonham.net](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/46a35a/32.png) [@Tim\_T-Bonham.net](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tim_T-Bonham.net)\ **Post date:** [February 13, 2010, 8:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gays-ok-in-military-but-not-homosexuals-wtf/528718/29 "2010-02-13T08:43:26Z")
> [@Larry\_Borgia](#): > > It just shows that people will respond differently if a question is worded differently, even if the content is the same. I suppose gay sounds bright and cheery while homosexual sounds vaguely menacing. Quite true. It’s why you see conservatives referring to “homosexual marriage” (usually with scare quotes) while liberals refer to “Equal marriage rights”. Each side trying to use a term that pre-disposes people to support their side. ---
**Author:** ![Rand\_Rover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/db5fbb/32.png) [@Rand\_Rover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rand_Rover)\ **Post date:** [February 13, 2010, 2:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gays-ok-in-military-but-not-homosexuals-wtf/528718/30 "2010-02-13T14:15:25Z")
> [@t-bonham@scc.net](#): > > Quite true. > It’s why you see conservatives referring to “homosexual marriage” (usually with scare quotes) while liberals refer to “Equal marriage rights”. Each side trying to use a term that pre-disposes people to support their side. But according to this study, the reason liberals would want to use a term like that is not to spook other liberals. Despite all their lofty rhetoric, their support for an issue drops precipitously after a simple word change. ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [February 13, 2010, 3:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gays-ok-in-military-but-not-homosexuals-wtf/528718/31 "2010-02-13T15:21:10Z")
> [@Rand\_Rover](#): > > But according to this study, the reason liberals would want to use a term like that is not to spook other liberals. Despite all their lofty rhetoric, their support for an issue drops precipitously after a simple word change. The sub-group among whom the word change would most alter support is the group that most supports the repeal. You wouldn’t expect much change among a group with higher percentages opposing repeal regardless of what you call it. But somehow you spin this to indicate that Democrats are all talk. Like many Republicans who support gay rights, you find it necessary to believe that your party is somehow not objectively much worse on the primarily civil rights issue of our day. ---
**Author:** ![JRDelirious](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jrdelirious/32/9531_2.png) [@JRDelirious](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JRDelirious)\ **Post date:** [February 13, 2010, 3:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gays-ok-in-military-but-not-homosexuals-wtf/528718/32 "2010-02-13T15:37:53Z")
> [@Rand\_Rover](#): > > But according to this study, the reason liberals would want to use a term like that is not to spook other liberals. Despite all their lofty rhetoric, their support for an issue drops precipitously after a simple word change. Ah… BUT: the article identifies the poll respondents’ (presumably self-declared) political alignments NOT as “liberals” v. “conservatives” (ideology) but rather as _Democrats_ v. _Republicans_ (electoral voting pattern). What that then suggests to **me** about that difference is that the Dems’ pattern of coalition building, as opposed to the Reps’ harder-edged line, ends up with the set of self-identified “Democrats” containing a comparatively larger subset of those who are just barely leaning to this side of the fence, and who have to be nuanced into staying on the same page. Which as a lifelong Democrat stopped surprising me long ago. ---
**Author:** ![Alienhand](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/8edcca/32.png) [@Alienhand](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alienhand)\ **Post date:** [February 13, 2010, 3:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gays-ok-in-military-but-not-homosexuals-wtf/528718/33 "2010-02-13T15:38:10Z")
Here’s the [complete poll](http://documents.nytimes.com/new-york-times-cbs-news-poll#p=1). Some interesting results in there and at the end is the break down of respondents. There are no crosstabs breaking down the responses by group despite the article doing so (looking around, this seems to be typical for CBS/NYT poll results postings), any one know why? ---
**Author:** ![Rand\_Rover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/db5fbb/32.png) [@Rand\_Rover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rand_Rover)\ **Post date:** [February 13, 2010, 5:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gays-ok-in-military-but-not-homosexuals-wtf/528718/34 "2010-02-13T17:43:15Z")
> [@Richard\_Parker](#): > > The sub-group among whom the word change would most alter support is the group that most supports the repeal. You wouldn’t expect much change among a group with higher percentages opposing repeal regardless of what you call it. But somehow you spin this to indicate that Democrats are all talk. Like many Republicans who support gay rights, you find it necessary to believe that \*\*your party \*\*is somehow not objectively much worse on the primarily civil rights issue of our day. The first part of your post has some merit, and I agree that that is one part of explaining the discrepancy. The second part of your post, especially the bolded part, is complete shit. I’m not a Republican. Most Republicans would hate me if they knew me (hint: I’m an atheist). ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [February 13, 2010, 5:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gays-ok-in-military-but-not-homosexuals-wtf/528718/35 "2010-02-13T17:46:13Z")
Sorry, I was under the impression you voted for John McCain in the last election. ---
**Author:** ![Lucky\_13](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lucky_13/32/13209_2.png) [@Lucky\_13](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lucky_13)\ **Post date:** [February 13, 2010, 11:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gays-ok-in-military-but-not-homosexuals-wtf/528718/36 "2010-02-13T23:00:18Z")
> [@VinylTurnip](#): > > _ **Q:** _ What is the maximum level of gayness that you think should be allowed for military service members? > > A) Hmm… that guy, I dunno > B) $3 bill > C) Box of birds > D) Fendi clutch purse full of rainbows You forgot E) French horn. [QUOTE=Claude Remains] Skewed results as all “polling” was done by Private Parts and Major Woody. [/QUOTE] What, they didn’t allow any rear admirals to participate? ---
**Author:** ![Cat\_Fight](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/90ced4/32.png) [@Cat\_Fight](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cat_Fight)\ **Post date:** [February 14, 2010, 12:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gays-ok-in-military-but-not-homosexuals-wtf/528718/37 "2010-02-14T00:33:21Z")
While I think there’s something to be said about the ‘sex’ in homosexual, I also think it’s worth pointing out that only one of the categories explicitly includes women (whereas I’ve read a number of op eds about homosexuals that seems to exclude them completely form the category of ‘homosexual’ i.e. rants about high instances of AIDS). It’s odd though that they didn’t just write ‘gay men and women.’ Maybe some people think ‘lesbians’ and think ‘lesbian porn? I like that!’? ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [February 14, 2010, 12:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gays-ok-in-military-but-not-homosexuals-wtf/528718/38 "2010-02-14T00:47:26Z")
> [@Rand\_Rover](#): > > I’m well aware it was mentioned in the OP. I said it wouldn’t get much discussion, imnplying in posts fokkowing the OP (and mine). > > I am not a Republican. So, I’m not bragging about “my side.” > > So, you’re 0 for 2, bub. What else you got? It was not the subject of the poll or the discussion. He wondered how people can vote for Gay but not homosexual. But I suppose you would rather it be about the apparent Dem problem. Wonder what Libertarians said? ---
**Author:** ![Nava](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/da6949/32.png) [@Nava](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nava)\ **Post date:** [February 14, 2010, 3:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gays-ok-in-military-but-not-homosexuals-wtf/528718/39 "2010-02-14T03:58:13Z")
> [@Scarlett67](#): > > Don’t forget those filthy thespians and public masticators. People who masticate openly in public should not be allowed to serve in the military or anywhere. Maybe we could get a “basic manners” course added to basic training? ---
**Author:** ![Rand\_Rover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/db5fbb/32.png) [@Rand\_Rover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rand_Rover)\ **Post date:** [February 14, 2010, 4:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gays-ok-in-military-but-not-homosexuals-wtf/528718/40 "2010-02-14T04:05:38Z")
> [@gonzomax](#): > > It was not the subject of the poll or the discussion. He wondered how people can vote for Gay but not homosexual. But I suppose you would rather it be about the apparent Dem problem. Wonder what Libertarians said? Mooseburger. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gays-ok-in-military-but-not-homosexuals-wtf/528718.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gays-ok-in-military-but-not-homosexuals-wtf/528718.md?page=3)