No more "don't ask, don't tell"
« previous post | next post »
We've often commented on the foolishness of the US policy of discharging badly needed Arabic interpreters and other soldiers who reveal that they are gay. It looks like this won't be coming up again. President-elect Obama has now definitively stated that he will eliminate the current "don't ask, don't tell" policy. It won't happen immediately though as a change in legislation is required.
Lazar said,
January 15, 2009 @ 5:30 am
I hope it doesn't turn into an inevitably delayed campaign promise.
Lazar said,
January 15, 2009 @ 5:31 am
…or… endlessly delayed.
David said,
January 15, 2009 @ 9:30 am
This is one of those "for your own good" types of things that never should have been made policy. For example, non-Christians seem to get fragged (killed by friendly fire) quite a bit more often than Christians, but the Commander in Chief has never instituted a don't ask don't tell for that subgroup of enlisted persons (as far as I know, IANA…military historian).
Theophylact said,
January 15, 2009 @ 10:18 am
Actually, it's Robert Gibbs who has "definitely stated" it, not Obama. But I have hopes that the statement is an authoritative one.
Karen said,
January 15, 2009 @ 11:02 am
This policy was a hopeless and inept attempt to have it both ways. As such policies usually do, even when better thought out than this one, it failed.
IronMike said,
January 15, 2009 @ 11:56 am
I've been in the military for 23 years and have known gay "soldiers" throughout my career, at least those who found me trustworthy enough to reveal their secret.
But I must caution LL readers who think that the doing away of "don't ask, don't tell" will be an improvement. Remember, please, that before "DADT" gays were kicked out, too. What's more, those were the days when organizations like OSI, NCIS, USACIC actively hunted out gays and lesbians. I cannot tell you how many times my wife and I sat at a gay club in Europe (they have the best music and dancing) with one of our gay servicemember friends and we'd spot an obvious undercover agent sitting uncomfortably in a corner pretending to enjoy himself. Or the time I spent an hour in my commander's office with him trying to get me to betray a trust and reveal if a friend of mine was gay, without, of course, actually asking the question.
As a servicemember, I actually saw DADT as a positive step toward the inevitable elimination of any ban on gays serving. After all, no matter how many folks "know," a gay servicemember can't be kicked out unless s/he admits. Granted, I believe that they should be allowed to be open about their orientation. But the few gay servicemembers I know that "got kicked out" wanted out of their contracts early or wanted out of an assignment or deployment…unfortunately, because that gives a bad name to all the honorably serving gay and lesbian military members.
Bill Poser said,
January 15, 2009 @ 11:56 am
Theophylact,
Yes, but when it is someone's official spokesperson it isn't unreasonable to attribute the statement to the person himself. A week later the press would report: "The White House said X".
Karen said,
January 15, 2009 @ 12:53 pm
Sure, there are two ways to do away with it: go back to witch-hunting, and go forward to not caring.
Karen said,
January 15, 2009 @ 12:56 pm
Plus, I knew several gays in the military who were outed and kicked out when they didn't want to be. Anecdotes cut both ways… though just possibly, had DADT really been implemented (the DA part was *very* narrowly interpreted if not ignored), it would have been a step forward. Instead, it became, so far as I can tell, a way to corner gay service members, and certainly a way to deny them any benefits for their service.
Don Sample said,
January 15, 2009 @ 4:09 pm
IronMike: They aren't just saying that they are ending "Don't Ask, Don't Tell." They are saying that they are going to lift the ban on gays in the military. You will be able to tell people you are gay, and they won't be able to kick you out just because you said so.
David said,
January 15, 2009 @ 4:37 pm
Anecdotally, the only gay people I've known in the military have been women (possibly a function of women's representation in the discipline where I studied, 70/30 or more in my classes). Being out didn't present many problems for them. However, I've never met a gay serviceman, ever. If it weren't for accounts in the press, I'd be hard pressed to give evidence they exist.
Just like Iran!
IronMike said,
January 15, 2009 @ 8:06 pm
Please don't get me wrong. I am not a homophobe. I am one of the many of my generation who can't wait for the old, grizzly gray-haired generals to retire so that those of us who really don't care if our bunk mate is gay or if a gay guy looked at us in the shower (chances are we aren't as good-looking as we think we are) can get on with serving and not worry about it. I'm just worried that the witch-hunts will start again.
And before all the anecdotal stories come out about DADT leading to more gays getting outted: it still doesn't matter. There are plenty of gays and lesbians openly serving (even with my lack of "gay-dar" I know them when I see them, they're that obvious) and unless they out themselves they're safe. And why, you might ask? Because, if they are outted by someone and a commander tries to go to JAG with this information, the commander is told to pack sand. JAG cannot process separation paperwork for "the gay reason" for a servicemember that doesn't admit he or she is gay. Period. It has been tried by commanders before and very smart lawyers (both military and civilian) have informed the base JAG that if the witch-hunting continues, there will be a suit following. And it stopped. And in a couple of instances I am aware of, the commander was quietly told to STFU.
Back in the day, before DADT, commanders or even senior enlisted could harrass the gay servicemember w/o anyone telling them to quit it. My dear friend, who happened to be my wife's supervisee and one of the best at our job that I've (still) ever seen, got really drunk one night (this is in Europe) and ripped his clothes off (just the "top half) and ran around base until he fell and cut up his face pretty badly. He was taken to the hospital by the military police b/c they thought he was on drugs. We (his friends) were concerned b/c we thought someone dropped something in his drink and we didn't want him to get kicked out for drugs if someone set him up.
Well, at the hospital he was babbling in Spanish and German, and the MPs thought he was revealing secrets about his job so they grabbed one of his friends and asked her to watch over him and make sure he wasn't talking about his sensitive job. He wasn't. In fact, he asked her to take his keys and go to his barracks room and hide his gay mags. He was afraid that the unit's leadership would find it when they searched his room (for the drugs they thought he was on). (She wasn't able to get to his room in time, but in the end it didn't matter. All the magazines proved was that he was curious.)
In the end, they removed him from his job and put him to work under a crusty-old caveman of a senior enlisted man, who, according to our friend, would say "Howdy faggot" whenever he walked by. He was given menial work for his rank and after several weeks he finally went in to the commander's office and said: "I'm gay and I want out."
During those weeks, those of us who knew him well were repeatedly called in to the commander's office and asked every possible question short of "Is _____ gay?" And remember, this is prior to DADT.
I just don't trust the military (this coming from someone with 23 years service) not to bring back the witch hunts. I am cautiously optimistic that our new CJCS Admiral Mullen is talking about the issue. I think he is not quite as gray-haired, and understands that whether he likes it or not, the chances are he's been oggled or at least looked at by a gay dude…and you know, it's okay.
Sorry for the long post but this is an issue I feel strongly about…I'm glad we're all talking about it.