http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/...itary-Gays.php
What are your opinions about the "don't ask, don't tell" policy?
Printable View
http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/...itary-Gays.php
What are your opinions about the "don't ask, don't tell" policy?
Idiotic and harmful.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kralizec
I think it's about time Pentagon employees signed a statement saying that they think terrorists are a graver threat to America than gays. :shame:Quote:
Lawmakers who say the military has kicked out 58 Arabic linguists because they were gay want the Pentagon to explain how it can afford to let the valuable language specialists go.
Seizing on the latest discharges, involving three specialists, members of the House of Representatives wrote the House Armed Services Committee chairman that the continued loss of such "capable, highly skilled Arabic linguists continues to compromise our national security during time of war."
One sailor discharged in the latest incident, former Petty Officer 2nd Class Stephen Benjamin, said his supervisor tried to keep him on the job, urging him to sign a statement denying that he was gay.
How silly, all of this. It's one twisted fundamentalism undermining the struggle against another. I say we subject all Pentagon officials to fifty lashes in retaliation. Or force them to sit out an entire episode of those handbag-toting Teletubbies. Whichever they deem worse.
The Navy eh? That reckons. :laugh4:
'Join the Navy and feel a man.'
'How do you seperate the men from the boys in the Navy?
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:
Well if the gays can have an hetero free bar down under, (pun intended), then the USA can have a gay free Navy if it so desires.
:indian_chief: :biker: :cowboy: :builder: :policeman:
Depends. Some men (many men) would feel intimidated by openly gay men in the military. Unit cohesion and trust between soldiers and morale may be more important.
Well, it's not as though we need people who speak Arabic, after all. I say throw them all out!Quote:
Originally Posted by Kralizec
This is a dilemma. On the one hand, openly gay individuals most definitely do not nor will they ever belong in the military. However this is inconvenient when it comes to individual cases involving high-priority jobs like these linguists-- the "system" will try to coddle and pencil-whip and bend the rules in such cases, but it nearly impossible to simply break the rules in a clear-cut way.
If it's any consolation, fifty-odd linguists is a small number, and most of them were probably pretty crappy at their job. That just goes for military linguists in general, though.
LOL...Quote:
Originally Posted by InsaneApache
Time to send in a Seaman to swab the Rear Admiral's Poop Deck.:laugh4:
This was a dumb decision. I use to have an issue about the whole "gays in the military thing" but its not really an issue. My thing is there are some folks in the service that might hurt those that openly serve. But you have the same issue with having chicks in the service as well. Oh well, you can't have a perfect military force until the only people allowed in the services aren't people at all (cyborgs, clones, robots, Bill Murray in Stripes). Let em serve especially when they can be helpful with more than just window treatments.
The only thing is I knew lots of homos when I was in and they did a good job. Granted, I wasn't in a combat unit where there might be too much macho bravado. The thing is, if you go by the letter of the UCMJ, there shouldn't be ANY form of sexuality on disply in the work place. So I say...Quote:
Originally Posted by Grey_Fox
You're here, You're queer, translate this Arabic language dear...:yes:
Dave brings up a good point. I understand that in principle, "Don't Ask Don't Tell" might rub people the wrong way :knuddel: (pun intended), but in practice, does it ever really come up?
Now I don't know if and how the policy has changed - but when I was a commander back in 1996-1997 time frame the policy was don't ask, don't tell. The offical JAG policy when I asked the assigned JAG lawyer for my command was that the only way I could do anything as a commander under this policy was to either catch the soldier in the physical act or for that soldier to volunteer that information - ie the soldier wanted a way out of the military.Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Corleone
So I would image that that there is information concerning this story that is being left out.
From what I've read, there is a wide variance from commander to commander in how "don't ask, don't tell" is interpreted. There have been substantiated stories about local gay bars being staked out, with soldiers who attend being ruled as having "told."Quote:
Originally Posted by Redleg
Seriously, doesn't the military have anything better for its commanders to do ? :inquisitive:Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemur
Interesting - since that was expressily forbidden by at least the Corps commander where I was assigned and I remember being told that the regulation was suppose to expressily forbid such an action, but I don't remember reading such a thing in the policy. However I don't have a copy of the regulation concerning this issue any longer, so I am not really sure if its was in the policy or if it was strictly the I Corps Commander for when I was a lowly battery commander.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemur
And yes doc military commanders have a lot more things to do, most of them better then staking out gay bars. Any commander that does or orders NCO's to do so - isn't paying attention to the things that he should. (at least that is my opinion on the subject.)
Apparently things are changing since I last read up on the subject ...
Petty Officer Jason D. Knight, a Hebrew linguist who says he had officially informed his superiors that he was homosexual, was discharged in April 2005 after completing his four-year tour of duty, according to a summary of his Navy personnel file.
Nine months later, the Navy recalled him to active duty, even though he was openly gay, and sent him to Kuwait, where he served as a translator and received multiple awards for exemplary service.
Knight's case underscores what some military specialists and gay rights groups believe is a growing trend: superiors and comrades ignoring the "don't ask, don't tell" policy because they care more about a service member's skills than his or her sexual orientation.
Years ago when you had to hide in the closet for being gay, they were easy blackmail. Now that most of them could care less about being known as a gay its harder to blackmail them. So the easy solution is if they are gay and admit to it, they can't really be blackmailed but if they said they were straight and later found to be gay then they lied and could be discharged
Its like that for most of the UCMJ, ask Redleg. There is a LOT left to the descression of the commander. I've known guys that got DUI's and were out in a month and others that barely got restricted duty.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemur
If I had to pick the "top 10 GI's" I'd ever served with, on that list would be 2 soldiers who happened to be gay.
One tried to tell me so once, but I stopped him from actually saying the words, reminding him of my duty under army regs (of the early 80's era). I just said, after interrupting him: "I know." He acted relieved, and things went fine after that. For him, it was important to clear the air, I think; to not deceive his leader.
Not on my top-10 list is a female soldier I had for awhile. She asked me what was the fastest way out of this blankety-blank army. She'd been a problem child for a couple of years; nevertheless I asked her "Are you sure?".
"I'd do anything legal", she said.
I told her to request an "open-door" session with the company commander, salute smartly, and say: "Sir, I am a lesbian." She thought for a moment, and I warned her that her discharge papers would obliquely refer to her admission (her DD 214 would cite the paragrapgh of AR 635-200 under which she was discharged).
She said "I don't care!", and did the deed. She was back home in Chicago in 72 hours. Was she gay? I dunno. But she was a druggie, though a careful one we hadn't been able to catch snorting.
I have no regrets about either case, though I admit I only used what I understood as the spirit of the law, not the letter. Talking with fellow NCO's, I've learned I was not alone.
Rules and reg's have changed since those days, but I'll bet sergeants still use the same philosophy: Unsolveable problem solder/danger to the platoon? = move him/her on to a happier place for all. Good soldier with a 'situation'? = protect him as best you can.
Maybe he should have been discharged for that instead....Quote:
Originally Posted by article
This just goes to prove that Government wants a Right Wing Military for the inevitable coup' de tas. Wouldn't want discension in the ranks and so forth. ~;)
Sounds like a good way out of the military for anyone who is tired of Iraq.:sweatdrop:
"Hello commander, can we make some love?":girlslap:
No, the proper way to approach an officer for sex is, "Howdy Commander Sugar Nips, care if I buff your helmet." Ooooray!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by Husar
I wonder if quoting the Dirty Hungarian Phrasebook would cut it ? "Put down your pants sir William, I cannot wait until lunchtime !"
I would have to liken my experience to that of KukriKhan and this was in the USMC, the lingo of FMJ a regular occurrence. The only open declarations to command that I can recall were made by those wishing exit service. Any of those Marines who were gay I would have had no issue defending on merit. I don't recall any sexual advances complained of or reported nor any inappropriate behavior exhibited by the gay Marines I knew.
In contrast.
At my time. at my base of service, there was a Zero tolerance for drug use. One positive equaled a dishonorable discharge. A couple years after I left, I heard of retention of these offenders, offering a 2nd and sometimes 3rd chance. Recalling specifically the quality of Marine in those who remained clean versus those who eventually popped positive I would have to say drug use is a much larger issue than homosexuality.
In further contrast.
Heterosexual women were and, from what I've kept up with, remain an issue to morale and discipline. I know I'm going to russle some feathers here..but here it goes. Aside from the 10% of marine women who I would label "attractive" the women you find there are rather...well, not arm candy. In civilian life you would rarely if ever approach them for a conversation in hopes of scoring a number. However in rather isolated base and deployment conditions these women are extremely "popular". At one station there was approximately a 40% pregnancy rate within their first 8 months of service. Among the others I remember such NJP and Court Martial proceeding as two women who had a...well...hmmm, oral contest to see who could collect the most dog tags. I believe in the proceedings it was revealed that the blonde won, 59 to 51. Oh yeah, this was over a time period of about 25 days. Some guys would say this should be a boost to morale, but the overall effect was quite negative. Discharges, discipline issues running rampant.
Moral of the story: Dont have sex with your fellow soldiers.Quote:
Originally Posted by ShadeHonestus
I still wonder what the real reason for the homophobia is:
Is it a fear for 'relationships' forming and similar things happening as what happens with the women ? Perhaps of a fear of it 'spreading' ?
Is it simply machoism ?
Isit fear that some will try to make a move on their fellow soldiers and that those would be eoffended and it would all create a 'bad atmosphere' ?
I don't like the term homophobia, but as a non expert I would hazard the guess at one of four things:Quote:
Originally Posted by doc_bean
Insecurity
Lack of education.
Lack of social skills.
Prejudice right or wrong in accordance with belief structures.
I support a person's choice to live a gay lifestyle as it is their decision ultimately despite biological claims. I also support people who do not accept gay lifestyle choices as appropriate or acceptable in their social realm. What I don't support is either a homosexual's demand for acceptance nor do I accept a person's prejudice to lifestyle superceding his respect for his fellow man. We all make choices, but we are all people no matter the choice.
All in all the policy regarding homosexuals in the military was not a matter of homophobia. Many will argue that it is but the military policy was a reflection of the society in general. The Regulations reflect the adjustment in society as it regards homosexual behavior - mainstream society still has problems accepting homosexual behavior, that the military in general is willing to ignore homosexual behavior that is not shoved into its face reflects that our current society is ignoring homosexual behavior that is not shoved into its collective face.Quote:
Originally Posted by doc_bean
To claim the military is homophic is a false generalization, one must look toward society as a whole.
To amplify Redleg's comments, the us military rules against homosexuality (and excessive indebtedness, and adultery, and fraternization, and all those things we nowadays almost accept as normal, and seldom legislate against) were seen as means of preventing a soldier becoming a target of spys, blackmailers, grifters, and other ne'er-do-wells, who could/would do harm to more than the individual soldier.
Now that homosexuality barely elicits a gasp of surprise, and adultery & fraternization get shrugged at, and the whole economy is based on huge individual indebtedness... maybe its time to re-think those areas.
What self-respecting spy would threaten PFC Snuffy with telling his commander that he fooled around on his last TDY? Snuffy would laugh and report Boris to the MPs.
That makes the whole policy even more stupid if possible. The soldiers who see no shame in admitting their sexual preference aren't going to be blackmailed over it, but they are the ones getting booted. :help:Quote:
Originally Posted by KukriKhan
Gah! That's what these commanders want you to think. I say they frequent gay bars for rather other motives, quickly pretending they are there 'staking out soldiers' when spotted. :yes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemur
The sad thing is that this statement probably has a grain or two of truth to it,Quote:
Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat
You've seen American Beauty, haven't you? :beam:Quote:
Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat
Well, to be honest, thing is that war is one thing, a "multifaceted" society another. My father was in the army (artillery), and used to say about women "I've no problem with them, but we won't take two sets of showers, two sets of toilets, everything in double because of them, it creates logistics problems".
And of course, there's a slight difference between a 20 years old foreign legion soldier and a 40 years old officer.... So the sex part is not to be taken lightly.
Hence potential "problems" with gay people in an army. So I would say, it depends if we're speaking of people working in radar stations or people fighting in the front lines.