By L.K. Regan
Published Jun 23, 2008

An extensive study of the military's "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy has found a potentially surprising effect—that lesbians are much more likely than gay men to be targeted by the policy, which mandates dismissing any personnel discovered to be gay or lesbian, The New York Times reports. The study used information gathered under a Freedom of Information Act request by the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network, a policy advocacy group.

Women make up 14 percent of Army personnel, but represent 46 percent of those dismissed under DADT. Similarly, 20 percent of Air Force personnel are women, but 49 percent of its discharges under DADT were lesbians. These numbers do not gel with discharges in general: in 2006, 35 percent of those discharged from the Army, and 36 percent of those discharged from the Air Force, were women. And, of course, these numbers are themselves skewed by DADT.

Aubrey Sarvis, the Servicemenbers Legal Defense Network's executive director, pointed out that, "Women make up 15 percent of the armed forces, so to find they represent nearly 50 percent of Army and Air Force discharges under 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' is shocking. Women in particular have been caught in the crosshairs of this counterproductive law."

The armed services dismiss an average of nearly two service members per day under DADT, with 627 dismissals in 2007, up slightly from 612 the year before. Both of these numbers, however, are only about half the averages seen before the current wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Still, despite the obvious current stresses on the military, DADT continues to be implemented.

The Army had the highest number of DADT discharges in 2007, shedding 302 soldiers under the policy. This was 22 more than the year before. The Marine Corps was up four from 2006, with 68 DADT discharges. The Navy held steady with 166, while the Air Force was down slightly with 91 dismissals compared to 2006's 102.

The study offered no answers as to why lesbians are targeted more than gay men under DADT—though to ask a question about reason with regard to a discriminatory and arbitrary policy may not be productive anyway. Certainly the policy is itself counter-productive: 41,000 new recruits could be found if the military would end the policy, a study conducted last year for the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network concluded.

Sedative wrote:

Women are expendable in the military. As simple as that. The military is one of the few remaining institutions that remain strongly chauvinistic.

Jun 24 7:24 AM

devildoginco wrote:

they couldnt find a better photo? lets just pick a random picture of some mo wearing camo. that'll do it.

Jun 24 4:57 AM

tiggerfitch wrote:

(cont'd) Whether there are more who aren't discharged because their commands don't pursue their discharges, or if their sexuality simply isn't known (as is the intent of DADT), we have no way of knowing if the ratio of lesbians to gay men among those discharged under DADT is indicative of the ratio of lesbians to gay men serving in the military. This ratio could represent a disproportionate number of women being discharged under DADT, or it could just represent the disproportionate number of lesbians in the military.

If there are three times more lesbians than gay men serving in the military, it would make sense that there are three times as many discharges. The bottom line is that because we don't know the ratio of lesbians to gay men, we don't know if the number of lesbians discharged is abnormally high.

Jun 24 3:16 AM

tiggerfitch wrote:

I can't help but think of the obvious here. First off, stereotypes have their origins in reality. Even extreme political correctness can't deny this. It's simply true. Secondly, there are plenty of exceptions to stereotypes, and that's why they can't be seen as anything more than generalizations and over-simplifications. This being said, and since there is no proper research to validate this, does it not make sense--even a little--that lesbians are more likely to serve in the military than gay men?

There is no way to know how many members of the military are homosexual. Even if the average in the total population is ten percent, this doesn't mean that the military maintains the same ratio. The military, as much as people might choose to think otherwise and despite its size, is not simply a cross-section of society. The percentage of overweight people is different than in the civilian population. The average level of education is different. Even the ratios among ethnic groups are significantly different. There's no reason to assume this is not also the case with homosexuality in the military.

The problem with this study, and every study concerning DADT, is that the preferred respondents--gays and lesbians serving in the military--can't honestly participate in them. As a result, the only statistics that can be trusted are, one, the opinions of persons not serving under the restrictions of DADT (i.e. civilians or former military members), and, two, those who have chosen to violate the UCMJ by participating. So, in this case, all you can look at are those who have been discharged under DADT (which doesn't include those who were discharged under other violations--a servicemember could have been discharged for violating a punitive article of the UCMJ and just happen to be gay, but in that case the DADT violation wouldn't be listed as the reason for discharge). Whether there are more who aren't discharged because their commands don't pursue their discharges, or if th

Jun 24 3:15 AM

slapaho18 wrote:

their contract. If they can't live by those rules and serve with honor then they don't belong in the military.

The DADT policy trully is silly however it gives gays in the military a way to protect themselves. It's a truce between so called straights and gays. Eventually, I'm sure it will go away the the DOD will come up with a more liberal standard that allows homosexuals to serve while still maintaining each services core values, moral, and good order. Sheeit... I'm sayn' if the Brits with their mangled teeth can do it why can't we?

Jun 24 12:42 AM

slapaho18 wrote:

This "extensive study" smells of rotten cooch to me. DADT is second only to Conscientious Objector in terms of cowardly methods for early termination of a service-member's contract with the Department of Defense (DOD). If you are even curious and serving in the military odds are your chain of command is suspicious of you. However, as long as you do your job well and don't make a Broadway Production out of your sexuality they will turn a blind eye to your potential gayness. By in large the US armed forces has come to accept homosexuals as long as they don't suck at their job and they keep their personal business private. I doubt that any of those discharged lesbians sacrificed their military careers in the name of the rainbow. I'm more incline to believe that most of those lesbians used DADT as a way of escaping being sent to serve in war zones. The rest of them probably weren't worth their weight as a Airman, Sailor, Soldier, or Marine and their chain of command found DADT to be a convenient out for them.

The war in Iraq has been going on since 03. Trust me, except for the Air Force none of the service branches are looking to thin the herd. The Air Force claims to be over manned and has been using force shaping to reduce manning since at least 2004. That means they are giving large numbers of Airmen the option to terminate their contract early with no penalty. Those who can't meet their fitness requirements are getting the boot even faster these days than prior to 04. Airman of specific skill sets are also being given the Blue to Green option. Basically they would transfer over to the Army. Transferring over to the Marines may be an option as well but I'm not certain of that. Anyway, this article is simply rhetoric for the purpose of feeding simple minded homos who allow their sexual orientation to define who they are. Gays in the military took an oath to serve and the rules were clearly stated and available before they every signed thei

Jun 24 12:40 AM

relax5 wrote:

This doesn't surprise me as much. Some women in the military who are lesbian tend to look butch. When I was in the Marines, a lot of people knew that our girls were Lesbians. We knew not to spread our business.Don't ask don't tell and you don't get caught do you don't get kicked out. It sucks still, knowing how much statistically now. I just can't wait for this ban to lift. Soon enough though...soon enough.

Jun 23 7:49 PM