Ignoring "Don't Ask, Don't Tell"

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 17, 2007 12:54 AM GMT
    A few minutes ago my partner and I watched the "60 Minutes" segment related to the military selectively ignoring "don't ask, don't tell" for highly needed jobs, e.g., medics, translators. One armed service member cooperated with his superiors in an investigation of himself, provided photos, videos of he and his boyfriend, and the conclusion of the investigation was: "Go back to work, you're not gay." I know there are a lot of RJ members that are/were members of the armed services during the DADT era. How has the policy been enforced? Selectively? My partner believes "It's all right to be gay, just don't act on it" My belief is "It's ok to be gay and act on it as long as you don't acknowledge being gay."
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 17, 2007 2:13 AM GMT
    I dont think gays should serve until they drop the policy.
  • fryblock

    Posts: 387

    Dec 17, 2007 2:30 AM GMT
    i agree with caslon
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 17, 2007 3:16 AM GMT
    I was fortunate/unfortunate enough to not serve in the military. I believe the military age is about the time that most of us are figuring out our sexuality. What do Caslon & fryblock think guys ought to do when they figure out they are gay AFTER entering the military?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 17, 2007 3:39 AM GMT
    rigsby: you're right--lots of younger folks don't accept their sexuality until their twenties, and obviously sometimes beyond. So it's not like they hoodwinked anyone going in.
    And to your original question, I think it's being enforced selectively. It depends on the combination of the base/war zone leadership culture, lack of critical resources, etc.
    I don't agree that they should wait until the ban is lifted. It's very rare when one enters the military later in life, and they would have missed out. But it's certainly a commitment with compromises until that time.
  • RyeMac

    Posts: 50

    Dec 17, 2007 4:06 AM GMT
    ....re DADT policy being selectively enforced : can recall reading somewhere that for the "alternatively wired", the air-force is regarded as very tolerant ....and the marines the least. Wonder if that is really the case...??
    [ sorry i can't quote a source/link for that observation ]
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 17, 2007 6:48 AM GMT
  • coolarmydude

    Posts: 9196

    Dec 17, 2007 7:48 AM GMT
    It's very obvious that units selectively enforce DADT. A few years ago, a bisexual servicemember attempted to get out under DADT and was denied. Admission to being gay alone is enough to be booted under DADT.
    I am active duty and have served for the last 15 years and I expect to retire at 20. My service is not an endorsement of DADT, especially since I have served before DADT. And although there is plenty of homophobia amongst the ranks, it's far less homophobic since DADT was implemented by the poiticians. If you think it's wrong to serve in the military as long as gays cannot openly serve, then how can you be a part of a political party (especially Democrat as they are more gay friendly) when they don't fully support gay rights? Someone has to be on the inside. Someone has to prove the status quo wrong and dispel the myth that homosexuality is deviant behavior and undercuts honor and integrity. If I and countless others don't serve with honor and distinction as a homosexual, then how do we prove the status quo wrong?
  • coolarmydude

    Posts: 9196

    Dec 17, 2007 7:59 AM GMT
    Quoting gettoknowit: Obviously a lot of us don't accept our sexuality because we call ourselves "gay" instead of "homosexual". It's all about the dictionary's defintion.

    Semantics doesn't even begin to touch on the subject!

  • NickoftheNort...

    Posts: 1416

    Dec 17, 2007 10:02 AM GMT
    I do not know the extent to which the DADT policy is enforced by individual groups / segments with the US Armed Forces.

    However, a strategy of having all bisexual, gay, and lesbian servicemembers withdraw from the Armed Forces until the overall anti-BGL policy is removed would significantly weaken the position of BGL persons in terms of breaching the Armed Forces wall.

    One of the stronger arguments against DADT and the general Armed Forces anti-BGL attitudes is that there currently are BGL members serving; if all BGL members were to withdraw, the DADT and the attitudes will have proven successful and not in need of change.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 17, 2007 10:39 AM GMT
    The "Don't Ask. Don't Tell Policy" seems to have failed to bring about acceptance of the significant contributions of Americans of a gay sexual orientation.

    In addition, it seems to have impacted the validity of a whole community.

  • GQjock

    Posts: 11649

    Dec 17, 2007 10:56 AM GMT
    I don't think gay men or women should have to lie about anything ... much less to serve right now in an illegal war
    First we couldn't seve
    Then it's... keep your mouth shut or we'll boot your ass
    and now it's...well we're hard up for recruits and maybe we'll let you stay?
    I say all the gays in the military should come out en mass
  • coolarmydude

    Posts: 9196

    Dec 17, 2007 12:54 PM GMT
    Service to country rises above service to self. It's absolutely unrealistic for GLBT servicemembers to just decide as a whole to leave the ranks. It's also irresponsible to do so in a political manner in the midst of a war. It's apparently easier for outsiders to talk the talk, but walk a day in my shoes and you'll get a whole new perspective.

    Doesn't anyone else on here get angry when we hear of a so-called Christian deny business related service or church membership because someone is gay? So on the same token, wouldn't it be viewed as selfish and political for GLBT persons to leave the military en masse? Where would that leave our country?

    If you want to make a political statement concerning DADT, take it to the polls and to the courthouses. At least it's an active and realistic approach!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 17, 2007 1:43 PM GMT
    "Where would that leave our country?"

    With a sense of just how valuable GLBT people are. They don't seem to be getting the message any other way.
  • swimr

    Posts: 19

    Dec 17, 2007 1:49 PM GMT
    DADT is enforced selectively. It's a big deal to some commanders, and not to others. And even if you "don't tell," an accusation and investigation can end a career.
  • NickoftheNort...

    Posts: 1416

    Dec 17, 2007 2:06 PM GMT
    An en masse "We're here, we're queer, get used to it!" would certainly be more effective (at least in terms of publicity-important visuals) than silently quitting the Armed Forces; it would throw ball into the Armed Forces' court and coerce them toward some form of action.

    re: coolarmydude
    I disagree with your allegory as you draw two samples that do not compare well. In the Christian vs. gay example, an employer / service provider denies providing service; in the gay vs. Armed Forces, the gay man denies being employed in a workforce where he is expected to denounce a signficant part of his human identity (good luck convincing me that who you feel affection toward and erotic stimulus toward is not a significant part of your identity).
  • BlackJock79

    Posts: 437

    Dec 17, 2007 2:16 PM GMT
    I was in the Air Force for 5 years and during the time I was in the policy was actively enforced. If they heard rumors about you being gay you were placed under a microscope. This was of course BEFORE I "figured out" that I was gay. I knew I was attracted to some... MOST of the men on base too... I was on a Special Ops Base and let me tell you, there is NO shortage of hot muscular eye candy to look at. I hear that now you are still supposed to "Don't ask, Don't tell" but with the war on going and numbers being so low, you could basically send pictures of yourself with a man fucking you in the ass and another one sucking you off to your commander and they would be like "That's nice. Now be here at 0600 for work. Thanks." LOL, from what I hear you can't even use that as an excuse to get out of the military anymore. When I was in, if you mentioned that you were gay that was a one way ticket HOME. Guys and girls would use that excuse to get out of deployments and out of the military. One guy used that excuse to get out of going to the desert and I had to go in his place. What makes it so bad is that he wasn't gay but I am. LOL, I'm also getting e-mails from this veterans group I'm a member of that generals are sayin that it's time to let go of that policy because it isn't like anyone is still enforcing it, especially not now in these times. Maybe if this war ever ends then they would go back to that policy...
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 17, 2007 8:20 PM GMT
    Don't understand why.... u.s. has this idea .. u.k . navy has gays to sev rol navy ... from 2000 as of ...icon_cool.gif
  • SpartanJock

    Posts: 199

    Dec 17, 2007 10:19 PM GMT
    The fact that DADT is not being strictly enforced by the US Armed Forces is not suprising! Why would the miliatry purposely reduce its force by a significant number when its numbers are not sufficient to begin with? This may actually give our brothers and sisters some ground to stand on in the (hopefully) not too distant future to openly serve in the military.

    *note: I had originally stated more, but lost the post. I will add more later when I remember all that I said! ;)

    PS: From what RJ members have stated in other threads, it no longer seems to be a major issue among the ranks of the military. More ground to stand on...?
  • Timbales

    Posts: 13999

    Dec 18, 2007 2:33 AM GMT
    Maybe I'm cynical, but it's my opinion that the military will allow any gay man or woman to serve as long as they need them, then dishonorably discharge them under DADT as soon as they are no longer useful.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 18, 2007 2:44 AM GMT
    I do have a lot of respect for gays and lesbians serving in the armed forces under DADT, but I couldn't do it. I thought about joining the Army shortly after graduation, and the only problem that I have is simply that because of DADT I can't serve openly. After five years of college I have come out of the closet as a gay athlete, faced my struggles and trials in my first few years of college. I'm now a comfortably adjusted out homosexual and really can't see myself in the armed forces if I can't live in a similar fashion as I used to. I don't really enjoy the thought of going back in the closet and having to face that whole situation over again. If DADT were repealed while I was still eligible to join the military, I would seriously consider joining. Being able to serve openly would give me the opportunity to prove that gay men and women can be open and out and still serve just as effectively as their straight counterparts.

    As far as other gay people serving while DADT is in effect, I personally don't recommend it. But it's not because I think we should make a political standpoint. I think that from a mental health perspective, exposing yourself to a situation like that can be very detrimental to a person's health, especially when mixed with the escalated stress of military life. But it is a personal decision, and if you feel that you are up to it then I wish you the best of luck.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 18, 2007 12:04 PM GMT
    I watched this episode of 60 minutes also and it was ridiculous. The guy representing the U.S. said that its not a good idea for us to allow gays to serve because our military goes into more hostile situations than other countries do and the troops could not have a sense of loyality, if you will, to each other if someone was uncomfortable that their were gays in their troop. What a bunch of b.s.

    Anyone willing to sign up and serve their country, knowing the whole time that they could be sent somewhere and killed, should deserve all the respect that we can give. Gays join the military to serve and protect like everyone else not as a hook up opportunity.

    Its a shame that the U.S. is so far behind on so many issues and the rest of the world is moving on...but we are the land of the free and home of the brave, right?

    uh huh
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 18, 2007 12:09 PM GMT
    Also, my son is in the marines and serving in Iraq right now. When he was in boot camp at Paris Island he said there were guys that said they were gay just to get out of boot camp and go home. They had to undergo psyciatric testing to "determine" if they were gay and many of them did not pass and they had to stay. The U.S. spends all this $ to keep us out and even more $ to train us and then determine when is a good time for them to kick us out when they dont need us anymore.

    If all of government were so concerned about sexuality in the work place then maybe we shouldn't let female interns work at the white house for fear of the president getting blow jobs in the oval office, but that would never happen, eh?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 18, 2007 12:25 PM GMT
    Yes, DADT is selectively enforced. Not because they need specific people with certain skills, but in a lot of cases the commanders don't agree with DADT and honestly couldn't care less if some one is gay or not. They do have some discretion in pursuing cases.
    As far as gays not serving because of the policy just seems ridiculous to me. I didn't join the military because I was gay, I joined to serve my country. To serve in the military is to sacrifice your personal needs for a greater good. Gay, straight, whatever have to make huge sacrifices to serve. I know so many guys who missed the births of their children because they were overseas. Me not being able to bring my BF to a military ball or something is not that big a deal to me, hell I go to them anyway unless I have to. Do I care that I can't tell people at work my BF is in town visiting me right now? Meh. I keep my personal and professional life separate and figure its none of their business anyway.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 18, 2007 12:58 PM GMT
    Gay people the world over should start their own friggin army and bend the will of the rest to our own.