Someone or something with potential or talent but lacking training or polish. The idiom refers to the fact that diamonds found in nature are rough and uneven. They must be cut and polished to bring out their true beauty. Also, 'a rough diamond'. A person of exceptional character or potential but lacking some polish and refinement. eg, "Jack is intelligent and trustworthy but lacks manners—he will be as hard to cut as a rough diamond". [Early 1600s]
Following on from a discussion on Theo's blog about the pros and cons of the wider employemnt of women in the Army, I stumbled across this frankly disturbing video on YouTube:
posted by Nick Dymond @ 13:12
4 comments
4 Comments:
I like this one better:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sQx6K9uOQaA
What the heck! Is it a spoof? Pretty unfunny. Don't tell me is a promo for a (failed I presume/hope) show.
There have been gay warriors throughout time. In all the major conflicts of the last century, one may reasonably assume that many gay men (and in some cases women) fought with as much bravery and distinction, as straight people.
From my own experience, the two very worse "situations" I ever had to deal with, my door partner was gay. He was also truly lethal, and in a very calm and deliberate way. We prevailed on both occasions thanks to him.
Time to bury the gay sterotype I think.
I agree with Theo here. I think the "gay" issue is often made light of, but it's time to seriously confront the underlying issues at hand. At least for the U.S. military. Since I'm an American, I'll comment specifically to that.
I think "integration" needs to happen now. Critics would point to a breakdown in unit cohesion if open homosexuals were permitted in the ranks. Supporters would point to the integration of African-Americans and women. Yes, they took place in very different times and in different circumstances. But the fact of the matter is that the U.S. military needs all the motivated troops it can get. When faced with back-to-back-to-back deployments, the U.S. military cannot afford to be denying willing and able individuals the right to serve. I recently read a story about an Arabic linguist who was discharged because she was a lesbian. An Arabic linguist?! Sounds like a pretty important job to me.
And how about the civil-military tensions at play? Example: see former Secretary of State and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, General Colin Powell's open criticism of former President Bill Clinton on his "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policies during a graduation speech at Harvard. Talk about setting the example.
And finally, I honestly just don't understand how it makes one bit of difference if someone goes home to their wife, girlfriend, boyfriend, husband, or whoever else so long as they are disciplined, loyal, and capable in their professional and personal lives.
Interesting article by Elizabeth Kier on this in Int Security, can't recall the exact vol now, it was a few years back. But basically she explored the integration issue for gay men and women in the military, looking at the integration of African-Americans from 1940s-1970s as a comparative case.
Post a Comment
<< Home