Gays and the US Military

Post Reply New Topic

The "logic" here is not all that dissimilar from the "logic" that kept blacks in separate military units up until Pres. Harry Truman used his authority as C-in-C to order units to integrate - "I don't really have anything against the darkies, but some of the boys are uncomfortable around them, so it could hurt unit morale!"

Since Truman's order, and since the US armed forces' later actual enforcement of regs against racial discrimination (sadly, mostly since the Vietnam era, but at least there's been progress), units have been thoroughly integrated, to the point that only outsiders are surprised by, for example, the ascendancy of Gen. Colin Powell. (The Army didn't care what he looked like - they cared how well he did his job.)

Now, were a similarly high-minded president to issue an order to drop gender-identity discrimination, and enforce the regulations afterward, one might be equally surprised at how quickly it would become a non-issue in the field - do you really care whether the guy who just grabbed his rifle and saved your ass thinks it's a cute one?

Aren't most sailors in the navy gay? Just something I heard.

I really don't mean to attack your point of view here, after all, it's a point of view shared by many in the military, but it's a point of view that leads to discrimination. You don't have to change your point of view, just realize that if you joined the military, you'd probably be in the same crowd that discriminates against gays. Also you have little understanding of group cohesion in times of stress, in a non-stressful environment the unit will be uncomfortable with a gay person (like they were with blacks). When you're getting hit by IEDs on a daily basis, you think your girlfriend found another guy and won't tell you, and you wonder if it's a good time to have goals in life, the last thing you'll worry about is whether a guy who works in the HQ tent is really gay or not. You are welcome to keep your mindset, but you're gonne get more of an explanation than you'll want if you keep challenging my logic with yours.

I hope so.

I've known a couple of sailors (I really didn't meet too many), they were either the biggest homophobes, or left the topic open (I really don't look into the gay thing). Strangely enough, the three times in my military career that I felt like I was being "approached" was 1. A philippino food server (he was obvious about it) 2. A 20 year-old civillian (he wanted to watch porn with me and called me 14 times in one night) 3. A marine in training (he just looked at me and kept talking to me, really friendly considereing that I was in the opposite branch). I actually did the whole gay jokes/insinuaton around some gay men (only realized it later), they were pretty cool about it. I mean I've heard some horror stories, but they always seem to involve the repressed type (never admitted their identity to anyone).

Before I respond, I'd like to add a disclaimer. I am not homophobic, I've known and respected a number of homosexuals. A good friend of mine growing up was raised by two lesbian mothers. I have absolutely no ill will for anyone with regards to their sexual preference or personal sexuality.

That being said...

This is easy to say, and maybe it is "right", but the reality is that the military is not interested in being politically correct beyond what is necessary to their function. What they are concerned with is practical functionality. Within that reality, it is perhaps in their best interest to try and make sexuality as much of a non-issue as possible. With "don't ask, don't tell" they're not saying "don't be gay", they're saying "don't be openly gay". They want to allow homosexuals to be a part of the military, but they don't want to deal with threats to group cohesion that exist because of homophobia.



It's the same logic. And logic doesn't need to be in quotes. Just because you disagree with the logic, does not mean it is in fact, not logic.

At the time, there was a similar social stigma with regards to minorities. Also unfortunate, but nonetheless true. Hopefully in the future we can remove the social stigma attached to homosexuals just as we have done to a large degree with minorities.



Understand that there is a reason it took so long for said regulations to be enforced. The social stigma with regards to minorities continued, regardless of President Truman's policy change, and only once said stigma had mostly dissipated did the regulations begin to be enforced. If President Obama made a similar policy change, it may also take quite some time for the actual stigma to dissipate (I would argue it will likely take longer, and perhaps never go away as much as the stigma regarding minorites). Perhaps Obama should make such a policy change, if only to hasten the removing of this social stigma. However, the military is not at all concerned with achieving social unity, they are concerned only with the practical functionality of group cohesion.



I wouldn't care, but that's neither here nor there. There ARE homophobic people in the military, and they would care. Just because you think that is petty does not make it untrue.



It's not my point of view, I am merely defending the logic behind it. I am being devil's advocate in this thread.

Of course, I agree that, if not directly leading to discrimination, it certainly doesn't do anything to remove it, and quite possibly reinforces it. However, that's not something the military is concerned with.



Well, I would never join the military, I am vehemently anti-war. But no, I would not be in the crowd that discriminates against anyone. That's not something I do.



Neither of us is a military expert. I never claimed to be one, so don't go and claim superior knowledge on this point. This is your opinion, and to be honest, I'm inclined to agree with you. However, that is not how actual military experts are likely to view it. They are not concerned with the varying degrees of group cohesion, they are concerned with absolute group cohesion. Any barrier to absolute group cohesion is one they will try to remove.



Again, it's not my mindset, I am just refuting others use of opinions and emotion to claim superior logic. Quite honestly, there is little to no logical argument that you put forth in this post, and I'm quite sure that any person that recognizes logic will come to the conclusion that my post is just chock full of logic. Not only am I putting aside the emotion, I am arguing the logic of a view I happen to find quite disconcerting.

Go ahead and "explain" if you like, but all I see so far is opinion.

I'm sorry, I just thought you were defending the standpoint, but I can see where you're coming from, a rational explanation of the mindset. I'm sorry I accused you, I just have an emotional connection with the issue. The clerk I mentioned committed suicide and the HQ tent where he worked didn't have a care in the world, they punished him for something he didn't do after they found out his identity (maybe not purposfully, but they made a bad decison after finding out he was gay). There's guilt everywhere, I feel some, the people working closely with him don't want to feel any, and I spend a lot of time regretting the way things turned out. That's what I was holding back from a rational discussion on the issue because the gult isn't entirely rational (it's logical for me but it isn't rational).

The army likes to sweep things under the rug, they don't enforce the gay thing in most cases because they're in need of manpower. Sexual assaults happen and they don't want to respond properly if one of their good soldiers did it and he was such a great worker, the chain of command is so bad at doing the right thing that CID (criminal investigatory divison [assumed acronym]) has to sneak into units to see if they're actually responding the way they should. I can't think of a reason why women can't be in a combat arms position, when you examine the issues separatly. Hell, I wasn't supposed to be in myself (I straight up lied to get in), I didn't get a silver star or anything but I didn't screw to pooch either, in fact it made me realize there were tons of people there with AS who didn't even know it. I mean people there had such bad social skill and got themselves in so much trouble that I wonder who's brain is really messed up, the AS or the NT, and what's the difference anymore? Does an AS just lie to themselves while an NT lies to everyone else? Sorry I'm rambling but I just had to get that out there.

Yes, the army is only concerned with cohesion and also being able to draw the maximum number of people as possible into the army. With a don't ask, don't tell policy they can have both homophobes and homosexuals; whereas with other policies they'd have to choose one group or the other. Their current actions make sense really.

In my observations of life and people.

Men who are homophobic are either homosexuals in denial or have a lack of confidence in their own sexuality.

Many heterosexual men deal with attractions to the same sex without letting it become a major hang up for them. A man not comfortable and confident in his sexual orientation takes offense at anything "gay" because of his inward fears and insecurities.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reaction_formation

Second time in as many days i have linked that

When I was in the Army Air Force from 1944 to 1946 there were gay guys in my unit. I am straight but there was never any trouble. A few of the gays were my friends and the subject never arose. If there were mixed men and women in units some would enjoy screwing and some would not and that, if kept to the level of personal preference and interpersonal decency should not bother anybody. I don't consider a female an open target for sexual molestation and just because we are mutually unclothed does not change the ethics of interpersonal relationships. I could shower without problems with gays, straights, women, dogs and giraffes (if we had a tall shower room). There was no problem with privacy when I was in and the toilets were in an open line in the latrine. Showers also were open and general. No problems. All this emotional garbage over being naked together is as idiotic as the Muslim rules about making their women look like draped hat racks. I have grown up.

They're too valuable to risk in combat of course.

If people are afraid that sexuality will reduce group cohesion in general, then really there should not be a double standard. If "don't ask, don't tell" is effectively "don't be openly gay", then at least have an effective policy of "don't be openly straight" as well.


Definitely.

Well, the US Navy does have this recruiting video:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=InBXu-iY7cw&feature=channel[/youtube]

I feel so super now!

also, the miltary is losing a ton of its translators on the don't ask don't tell, along with millions of dollars to have them discharged plus court martials plus lawsuits contesting the dishonorable discharge status.