Does the repeal of Dont ask dont tell apply to AS?

Page 1 of 3 [ 36 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next

_Square_Peg_
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 29 Jan 2009
Age: 33
Gender: Female
Posts: 640
Location: in a round hole

17 Jan 2011, 2:11 am

I used to serve in the United States Navy. When it became too stressful and had meltdowns every other day, I decided to get help. I told the counselor that the base provided me that I had Asperger's, that way he could get a better understanding and be able to help me out. But instead of getting help, I got honorable discharge due to medical reasons. I knew the Don't Ask Don't Tell policy applied to one's sexuality, but I had no idea it applied to one's mental conditions as well. After all, one of my ship-mates was bi-polar and was taking medication, but she still stayed in the Navy, so why couldn't an Aspie?
That happened two years ago.
Now that Don't Ask Don't Tell has been repealed, I want to know if Aspies can openly join the military too (not that I want to go back, I'm just curious.) But every article I've read only mentions gays & bis. Nothing about Aspies, Auties, or any mental condition.
I was wondering if anybody here knows about it or can help me find out.



Last edited by _Square_Peg_ on 17 Jan 2011, 2:31 am, edited 1 time in total.

apoapsis
Tufted Titmouse
Tufted Titmouse

User avatar

Joined: 28 Oct 2010
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 43

17 Jan 2011, 2:28 am

Good question. I want to know the answer as well. As an RPCV, I know that I would have never been allowed to do what I did had I divulged my condition. Why would anyone want to get diagnosed or tell anyone about it if it means professional ruin? It's frustrating.



menintights
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 29 Aug 2010
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 895

17 Jan 2011, 2:59 am

_Square_Peg_ wrote:
I used to serve in the United States Navy. When it became too stressful and had meltdowns every other day, I decided to get help. I told the counselor that the base provided me that I had Asperger's, that way he could get a better understanding and be able to help me out. But instead of getting help, I got honorable discharge due to medical reasons. I knew the Don't Ask Don't Tell policy applied to one's sexuality, but I had no idea it applied to one's mental conditions as well. After all, one of my ship-mates was bi-polar and was taking medication, but she still stayed in the Navy, so why couldn't an Aspie?


Because AS isn't manageable with meds alone?



DandelionFireworks
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 May 2010
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,011

17 Jan 2011, 3:13 am

I'm pretty sure we're still barred from rendering service to this country. That's fine; why give your life to protect a country that oppresses you and your fellows?


_________________
I'm using a non-verbal right now. I wish you could see it. --dyingofpoetry

NOT A DOCTOR


emjay89
Yellow-bellied Woodpecker
Yellow-bellied Woodpecker

User avatar

Joined: 4 Nov 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 67

17 Jan 2011, 7:37 am

as far as i know, the US Army has a permanent ban on anyone with Asperger syndrome



2ukenkerl
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Jul 2007
Age: 59
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,968

17 Jan 2011, 7:39 am

ANOTHER one of my pet peeves! Homosexuals were NOT allowed to join. They could be investigated, and rejected. It was a COMPROMISE that said they were allowed as long as they didn't make it an issue or obvious. THEN, they make it sound like DADT was a BAD thing for them and claimed they "repealed" it. It wasn't repealed, the original rule was overturned. This really only allowed the homosexuals to make it an issue.

Anyway, it was "PC" to allow homosexuals in. AS people really have no such protection, and will probably even have LESS, with all those idiots claiming they committed some murder, etc... because they SUPPSEDLY had AS.

I AM shocked that they let true manic depressives in. I have KNOWN people that have acted in the stereotypical way. If they do that in an enemy land, it could endanger the entire base. SURE it can be prevented by medicine, but NOT reliably. And what if they decide not to take the meds?



Delirium
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Nov 2007
Age: 29
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,808
Location: not here

17 Jan 2011, 8:16 am

Being gay doesn't interfere with your life in the same way that AS does.


_________________
I don't post here anymore. If you want to talk to me, go to the WP Facebook group or my Last.fm account.


zer0netgain
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Mar 2009
Age: 52
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,784

17 Jan 2011, 9:23 am

DADT was a gay-centered policy. Its repeal means nothing for people with AS.

Like anyplace else, if you don't want your AS held against you, don't tell anyone and don't have a formal Dx on record anywhere.

If they don't want people with AS, that's their policy. :(



Cornflake
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator

User avatar

Joined: 30 Oct 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 46,969
Location: Over there

17 Jan 2011, 9:48 am

2ukenkerl wrote:
It was a COMPROMISE that said they were allowed as long as they didn't make it an issue or obvious. THEN, they make it sound like DADT was a BAD thing for them and claimed they "repealed" it. It wasn't repealed, the original rule was overturned. This really only allowed the homosexuals to make it an issue.

Being forced to deny who you are should be an issue for everyone, not just gays willing to sacrifice their lives for their country.

You say: "as long as they didn't make it an issue or obvious"
I say: "but that would require me to live a lie".

How would you set about denying your sexuality, if you were required to?
And how do you think doing that might affect your ability to function?
Think about it for a while...


_________________
Giraffe: a ruminant with a view.


2ukenkerl
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Jul 2007
Age: 59
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,968

17 Jan 2011, 9:53 am

Cornflake wrote:
2ukenkerl wrote:
It was a COMPROMISE that said they were allowed as long as they didn't make it an issue or obvious. THEN, they make it sound like DADT was a BAD thing for them and claimed they "repealed" it. It wasn't repealed, the original rule was overturned. This really only allowed the homosexuals to make it an issue.

Being forced to deny who you are should be an issue for everyone, not just gays willing to sacrifice their lives for their country.

You say: "as long as they didn't make it an issue or obvious"
I say: "but that would require me to live a lie".

How would you set about denying your sexuality, if you were required to?
And how do you think doing that might affect your ability to function?
Think about it for a while...


It wouldn't cause you to live a lie, OR have a problem functioning. They simply shouldn't have applied. If drafted, they could simply say the truth, and be OUT! You are saying that the majority should have problems because the minority wanted to basically break the law. SILLY at best,

NOW, how about the MAJORITY's ability to function?

Even with women, they could simply keep them separate.



2ukenkerl
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Jul 2007
Age: 59
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,968

17 Jan 2011, 9:56 am

Delirium wrote:
Being gay doesn't interfere with your life in the same way that AS does.


Tell that toi the people on either side that came up with it. AND, there are ALSO records of people blackmailed with it being made public.



Cornflake
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator

User avatar

Joined: 30 Oct 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 46,969
Location: Over there

17 Jan 2011, 10:01 am

2ukenkerl wrote:
Cornflake wrote:
2ukenkerl wrote:
It was a COMPROMISE that said they were allowed as long as they didn't make it an issue or obvious. THEN, they make it sound like DADT was a BAD thing for them and claimed they "repealed" it. It wasn't repealed, the original rule was overturned. This really only allowed the homosexuals to make it an issue.

Being forced to deny who you are should be an issue for everyone, not just gays willing to sacrifice their lives for their country.

You say: "as long as they didn't make it an issue or obvious"
I say: "but that would require me to live a lie".

How would you set about denying your sexuality, if you were required to?
And how do you think doing that might affect your ability to function?
Think about it for a while...


It wouldn't cause you to live a lie, OR have a problem functioning. They simply shouldn't have applied. If drafted, they could simply say the truth, and be OUT! You are saying that the majority should have problems because the minority wanted to basically break the law. SILLY at best,

NOW, how about the MAJORITY's ability to function?

Even with women, they could simply keep them separate.

Hmm, Ok. :roll:
You present the argument and all the rationality of an unthinking mob, and as such I'm backing out right now.
Thanks for driving by.


_________________
Giraffe: a ruminant with a view.


ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 83
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,726
Location: New Jersey

17 Jan 2011, 10:14 am

No. D.A.D.T. pertains to sexual orientation.

ruveyn



Descartes
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Apr 2008
Age: 28
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,154
Location: Arlington, Texas

17 Jan 2011, 10:18 am

I had no idea that autistic people could be kicked out of the military. I would imagine that if somebody with autism were to enlist in the military, then they must be convinced enough of their capability of functioning properly in the military.

2ukenkerl wrote:
ANOTHER one of my pet peeves! Homosexuals were NOT allowed to join. They could be investigated, and rejected. It was a COMPROMISE that said they were allowed as long as they didn't make it an issue or obvious. THEN, they make it sound like DADT was a BAD thing for them and claimed they "repealed" it. It wasn't repealed, the original rule was overturned. This really only allowed the homosexuals to make it an issue.

Anyway, it was "PC" to allow homosexuals in. AS people really have no such protection, and will probably even have LESS, with all those idiots claiming they committed some murder, etc... because they SUPPSEDLY had AS.

I AM shocked that they let true manic depressives in. I have KNOWN people that have acted in the stereotypical way. If they do that in an enemy land, it could endanger the entire base. SURE it can be prevented by medicine, but NOT reliably. And what if they decide not to take the meds?


DADT was a bad policy because otherwise qualified individuals were kicked out of the military because they were found out to be homosexual. I'm glad it was repealed because it was a travesty on justice and an embarrassment on this country's behalf. My only regret is that it took so long to do so.


_________________
What fresh hell is this?


kfisherx
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Nov 2010
Age: 56
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,192

17 Jan 2011, 10:25 am

I served in both the Army and the USMC so I know that Aspies can serve..... BUT with the liklihood of meltdowns due to anxiety it probably is the fact that they should not serve. From my experience most of us probably cannot really do well when the high stress part of the job (ie war) happens.