When do we say Enough of this........Queering Nuclear Weapons: How LGBTQ+ Inclusion Strengthens Security and Reshapes Disarmament

[snailspace]

https://thebulletin.org/2023/06/que...trengthens-security-and-reshapes-disarmament/

 

[BrightShinyGirl]

https://thebulletin.org/2023/06/que...trengthens-security-and-reshapes-disarmament/

What did you find so outrageous about this article? It seems a pretty commonsense dissection of how the gendered assumptions of straight cis men can lead to irrational decisions when it comes to nuclear policy. I’d love to hear you break down your objections.

 

[ll74]

Gay people exist.

Sorry

 

[JohnnySavage]

Very insensitive to exclude the IA people from the title.

 

[Bray123]

We all know that only CIS people have any intelligence. Imagine if people like Alan Turing had been gay?
Oh, wait...

 

[RoryN]

What did you find so outrageous about this article? It seems a pretty commonsense dissection of how the gendered assumptions of straight cis men can lead to irrational decisions when it comes to nuclear policy. I’d love to hear you break down your objections.

...aaaaaaand crickets.

BrightShinyGirl wins; end of thread.

 

[John_von_Neumann]

Some folks become indignant at the most bizarre things. Granted, I'd want a generous amount of quantitative analysis before adapting any kind of queer theory to strategic nuclear policy. But the substance of OP's link is about as inoffensive as it gets.

 

[buaireadair]

 

[ll74]

Gay people exist.

Sorry.

 

[Rightguide]

What did you find so outrageous about this article? It seems a pretty commonsense dissection of how the gendered assumptions of straight cis men can lead to irrational decisions when it comes to nuclear policy. I’d love to hear you break down your objections.

It's kept us out of nuclear war since the end of WWII. Why fuck it all up by adding unnatural emotional distress into the equation.

 

[Lazaran]

What did you find so outrageous about this article? It seems a pretty commonsense dissection of how the gendered assumptions of straight cis men can lead to irrational decisions when it comes to nuclear policy. I’d love to hear you break down your objections.

•
I’m guessing it was this excerpt from the article:

“It’s about people. Equity and inclusion for queer people is not just a box-ticking exercise in ethics and social justice; it is also essential for creating effective nuclear policy. Studies in psychology and behavioral science show that diverse teams examine assumptions and evidence more carefully, make fewer errors, discuss issues more constructively, and better exchange new ideas and knowledge”

Or maybe this excerpt:

“Diversity and inclusion are especially important for the policy community dealing with arsenal development and nuclear posture. Women familiar with this “nuclear priesthood” describe it as “male-dominated and unwelcoming.” Homogenous groups like this are prone to groupthink and hostile to critical examination of baseline assumptions about how adversaries construct and identify nuclear threats and risks. For nuclear weapons policy, this has meant the perpetuation of theories like deterrence and crisis stability, which have contributed to increasing nuclear arsenals and a growing risk of nuclear use”