Department of Weird Weapons: The Gay Bomb
| Mon Jun. 11, 2007 5:49 PM PDT
Edward Hammond, of the University of California's Sunshine Project, obtained through a FOIA request Pentagon documents that indicated the military had, in 1994, investigated building a "gay bomb." The bomb would release a strong aphrodisiac that would cause the enemy army to become "irresistibly attracted to one another." You gotta give the military points for consistency: They clearly believe, World War II notwithstanding, that homosexuals in the ranks make the military ineffective. The proposal also indicates that conservatives are willing to act on their belief, notwithstanding the dismal success rates of the ex-gay movement, that sexual orientation is not at all innate. But the $7.5-million proposal's creepiness rating is extremely high. Not to mention the implication that being gay or lesbian is the biggest insult an army can bestow on its enemy—that it essentially equals destroying them—is deeply offensive to gays and lesbians, particularly those who've served with honor and distinction.
Continues Below
Continued From Above
Comments
Busty\Percy,
Just because it happened during the Clinton administration does not mean that it had the approval of the administration or even that the administration knew about it. The DOD is a very big place.
And Im puzzled at how the author takes this project to mean that calling someone Gay is the "biggest insult an army can bestow on its enemy?that it essentially equals destroying them". I dont see the connection. It is not saying it is an insult. It is saying that apparently in this whacky Rube Goldburgian situation that if this bomb went off it would create confusion among the ranks. I dont see a value judgement being made. Sure there are certainly homophobes in the military (more among the ranking generals than among the rnaks themselves for sure) but this proposal is not homophobic on its face. It is outlandishly stupid and a waste of money but not homophobic. If you can get your enemy to be doing or thinking about anything besides defending its phycical position then that is a good thing. If this idiotic bomb had done it's job it would have been good regardless of what it was they were doing. It is a very, very strange extention of the idea of dropping propaganda leaflets on the enemy to make them question why they were their.
Busty\Percy,
Just because it happened during the Clinton administration does not mean that it had the approval of the administration or even that the administration knew about it. The DOD is a very big place.
And Im puzzled at how the author takes this project to mean that calling someone Gay is the "biggest insult an army can bestow on its enemy?that it essentially equals destroying them". I dont see the connection. It is not saying it is an insult. It is saying that apparently in this whacky Rube Goldburgian situation that if this bomb went off it would create confusion among the ranks. I dont see a value judgement being made. Sure there are certainly homophobes in the military (more among the ranking generals than among the rnaks themselves for sure) but this proposal is not homophobic on its face. It is outlandishly stupid and a waste of money but not homophobic. If you can get your enemy to be doing or thinking about anything besides defending its phycical position then that is a good thing. If this idiotic bomb had done it's job it would have been good regardless of what it was they were doing. It is a very, very strange extention of the idea of dropping propaganda leaflets on the enemy to make them question why they were their.
Submitted by Busty Dilettante (not verified) on Mon Jun. 11, 2007 7:55 PM PDT.
And this, my friends, was during the "enlightened" Clinton administration.:-(
Wow, this brings up way too many questions...If you become gay this way does that mean you go to hell as well? Does it make you openly or gay or just closeted? Will intense christian counseling courses work to counteract the effects? How do they test these weapons - On recruits they immediately discharge (dishonerably of course)???
Busty\Percy,
Just because it happened during the Clinton administration does not mean that it had the approval of the administration or even that the administration knew about it. The DOD is a very big place.
And Im puzzled at how the author takes this project to mean that calling someone Gay is the "biggest insult an army can bestow on its enemythat it essentially equals destroying them". I dont see the connection. It is not saying it is an insult. It is saying that apparently in this whacky Rube Goldburgian situation that if this bomb went off it would create confusion among the ranks. I dont see a value judgement being made. Sure there are certainly homophobes in the military (more among the ranking generals than among the rnaks themselves for sure) but this proposal is not homophobic on its face. It is outlandishly stupid and a waste of money but not homophobic. If you can get your enemy to be doing or thinking about anything besides defending its phycical position then that is a good thing. If this idiotic bomb had done it's job it would have been good regardless of what it was they were doing. It is a very, very strange extention of the idea of dropping propaganda leaflets on the enemy to make them question why they were their.
How do college students feel about the gay bomb?? http://collegecandy.com/news/3447 Here is an article.
The mental pictures associated with this article are not comforting to an ex-paratrooper, if that's the right word.Then again ,I see worse on TV all the time.
I think Brian is mostly right,if it gives you 30 to 120 seconds it's better than nothing,but I would question even that - realistically.It sounds like more a humiliation device, imagine doing that to Muslim forces.It would be Abu-Ghraib X 1,000.
Submitted by Tom Donald (not verified) on Tue Jun. 12, 2007 11:26 PM PDT.
If the American army did have a gay bomb, you can bet they'd be accidentally dropping it on their allies within days. Talk about "friendly fire". I understand that British soldiers are already tremendously attractive though, I wonder if this bomb would really make much difference?
It's a funny story - and indicates that US Generals knew little of Sparta - or chemistry for that matter.
But the evil genious manifest in the plan - most chronically homophobic soldiers (particularly Muslims) would be most unlikely to risk being "gayed"...'rather dead than Pink'...or something like that.
Actually, I don't believe a word of it - is it April the first?
Brian K: If this was revealed to have happened under Dubya, everyone here would be shouting about how it was all his doing.
A little consistency is in order, if fairness is any sort of goal at all.
Either the Commander in Chief is responsible for what goes on in his mis-named Defense Department, or he isn't. His party shouldn't be a determining factor.
We shouldn't be excusing such lunacies when they happen on the watch of a C.I.C. we voted for, and crucifying the ones we didn't.
Submitted by Richard Aberdeen (not verified) on Wed Jun. 13, 2007 2:09 PM PDT.
Pardon the interruption, but I thought that members of the Pentagon and other "enemies" of peace and goodwill are already "irresistibly attracted to one another", which apparently is a significant part of the problem.
Hey, what was the chemical in that bomb? Will it work on heterosexuals? Where can I get some?
And what about profiling ethnicities via DNA mapping... and designing biological agents that target a specific "map"? Where's that these days?
The ludicrous, and potentially offensive, part of this whole plan was -- are they "turning" them gay, or are they making them HORNEY? or both?
To assume that because someone is attracted to the opposite sex, they will lay down their weapon and immediately begin screwing around is silly.
Austin,
You make a good point. Horny people neither throw down their weapons immediately nor change sexuality at the flip of a switch.
It is too bad though that armies the world over don't just lay down their weapons and start screwing. We could learn a lot from bonobos, the only great apes to have no record of intra-species lethal violence. They resolve all conflict through sex. All bonobos are perfectly bisexual. And, oh yeah, they're ruled by women.
Too bad we get more of our behavioral characteristics from common chimps.
Yee Gawds, you people who dont think being fricking gay is biological are DELUSIONAL. Science has proven that fact, get over your "burn in hell" attitude.
What's ironic is, Christians going throughout the world saying, "if you are not born again of Jesus Christ," you will burn in Hell. Sounds like another terrorist threat like the Jihad against Infidels.
Christians just do it more subtle than other religions. Catholocism is just as bad. Oh, and PRAY FOR YOURSELF, that the ONE TRUE GOD(metaphoric term for unintelligent beings) remembers to update your brain's intelligence, maybe a "RE-BOOT".
I am a Deist. "www.deism.com" We do not believe in the revealed religions. We believe in ONE GOD, that of nature and reason and that everything is already laid out. Get over yourself and stop violating my Constitutional Rights of "Freedom of Religion"
The Constitution protects those of different religious views from a tyranny of a majority or a minority.
Gay bomb indeed. That's how the GOPer's and Right Wing Zealots are spending hard earned tax dollars and getting richer and greedier as Televangalists, etc....
If you believe what you're brainwashed by, then GOD will judge you by those same standards which is HARSHER!
