They Didn’t Ask, She Didn’t Tell, and Yet…

It’s a good thing the Atlantic doesn’t have a “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy regarding gays. Andrew would be out the door since he’s openly gay. The military discharged quite a few gay service men that were fluent in Arabic at a time when we desperately needed interpreters. You can argue that might not have been a wise move. Straights and gays both have the same goal…to serve and protect our country. Patriotism swings both ways.

“Three-quarters of Americans think gay members of the military should be able to serve openly.”

Has anyone in the press asked the TROOPS how they feel about these grand plans?

Sexual orientation, like race, religion, politics, hair color, and favorite team, may not be grounds for immediate dismissal in some quarters, but the idea that we’re a nation of uncaring, unthinking homophobes is patently ludicrous.

This issue is more akin to the debate over having women in combat zones, than it is some discriminatory social engineering discussion.

There are many, many people in the military that still think it was a mistake to put women in harm’s way (poor upper body strength, lack of girth) and that the decision to do so has in fact made units more vulnerable. Even in forward logistical chores alone, this will not go away as an issue, i.e. proximity to combat areas where females may in fact have to engage the enemy beyond clerical duties.

But forget that, let’s talk about gay sex.

Because the Christians in the armed forces really shouldn’t have any say, if the press and academics dictate our moral compass.

Note: Polls indicate that blacks (about 20% of modern Army members) are far more opposed to gays in the military than are whites.

If an accurate DNA test for natural born gayness becomes available, what will that mean to the medical industry and schools and media (never mind the military)?

Should gays be excluded from such activities, due to their penchant for unprotected sex?

Or do we just skip over that part, in any discussion?

I assume that an openly gay Army member would be open about their STD charts too, correct?

Or do they get to pick and choose their Private Ryanish proclivities, cafeteria Kennedy style, and still on the taxpayer’s dime?

The libs think this is a simple issue, with a simple solution.

Nothing could be more liberal.

DNC Plan For AIDS Treatment:

LET THE ARMY DO IT.

= MARIN COUNTY ACCOMPLISHED =

As the CNN article you link to points out Amy, it’s expected to come up for a vote this calendar year – that’s pretty fast for Congress.

hulagate gets awfully theatrical when gayness comes up, don’t you think?
-
But forget that, let’s talk about gay sex.
-
Throw in tax cuts, and that’s pretty much the GOP’s domestic policy shop, right there.

Since you ask…I did ask my brother in law how he feels about gays in the military. My BIL is an active duty Marine, currently stationed in 29 Palms. He is been in the Marine Corp for the last 12 years. He stated that having gays in the military, serving in any capacity, does not bother him.

hula
.
You dumb phucking bumpkin look at the numbers ass hole. The members of the military ARE serving along side gays and lesbians. The only difference is right now those gays and lesbians can’t say they are gay and lesbian. If over 12,000 have been discharged since DADT just imagine how many more just hide it and nobody has a problem with them. How phucking stupid is that?
.
By the way hula, everybody knows that the people who are most homophobic are the same ones who are out trolling gay bars at night. Sound familiar?

Wow, I always knew that QH was ignorant but I had no idea his delusionary visions ran quite so deep. I find the notion that straights don’t also possess a “prenchant for unprotected sex” particulaty remarkable.

Probably doesn’t want to emulate the whole Clinton fiasco. But I agree, there’s no need to wait for this discriminatory policy.

” due to their penchant for unprotected sex”
.
You IS the craziest lady on the interwebs.

See what happens when Wal-Mart comes to town? Maybe the Phelps Phools will sta

Sorry – my comments are getting posted in mid-draft. I must be suffering from FFS (Fat Finger Syndrome).
.
As I was saying, maybe the Phelps Phools will start picketing Wal-Mart for letting lesbians shop there.

Personally I regret Hula’s parents penchant for unprotected sex.

Should gays be excluded from such activities, due to their penchant for unprotected sex?
.
I assume you speak from experience.

I understand that 17-24 year olds also have a particular penchant for unprotected sex. Perhaps they should be barred from the military as well.

Funnily enough, I’m in the middle of transferring from the Kansas to the Missouri National Guard. I’ve always been all-male units, either artillery or infantry. We actually talked about the repeal of DADT at drill this past weekend. The main points of concern were how much bullsh!t this would inject into our lives. (separate showers, more pointless harassment classes, separate housing/barracks areas, etc.)
-
But yeah, pretty much everyone agreed we a) needed the people and b) gays > felons and the mentally retarded. (seriously, there’ve been like three cases in the last year where some recruiter got a retarded kid all the way to MEPS. and GT scores have been dropping like rocks the last few years.)

gays > felons and the mentally retarded
-
I don’t know if I’d print that up and put it on t-shirts and banners, but it’s a compelling argument.
-
Seriously, Sean, nice post, thanks for the insight. I love that “The main points of concern were how much bullsh!t this would inject into our lives”– now that sounds like the military!
-
Or pretty much any large organization.

I can’t help but notice that Sean’s post includes the assumtion that gays would require segreagation from barracks and showers, etc. Do I dare tell him that he’s ALREADY sharing barracks and showers with gays?
.
It would appear that the knowlege of someone’s orientation appears more dangerous than that orientation itself. Interesting.

Paul,
-
You obviously don’t understand how the military works. Gays would require separate showers and barracks for the same reason women do. Can’t have the sexes mixing in a way that could possibly lead to sex. Harassment claims and all that. The only times I’ve every served with women are in training environments/schools. It sucks. You can’t even take your shirt off in the bay if there’s a chick in the building, even if she’s on a different floor. 40 guys will have about 1/2 hour to use the latrine. 6 chicks will get the same amount of time. It’s a big damn bunch of hassle.
-
Also, you spelled assumption wrong, but interestingly enough in a way that highlights the “making an assumption makes an ass-u-me” saying.

You’ve missed my point. Under the current policy – you’re already sharing showers.

Sean–
.
There was an op-ed this past weekend in the NYT from a sergeant(?) who served two or three tours in Iraq. He said the experience had changed his mind about gays in the military. He made no mention of expecting separate accommodation. I don’t actually see how that would work–would you be required to declare your sexual preference? And what do you do with bisexuals?
.

QH:
.
Note: Polls indicate that blacks (about 20% of modern Army members) are far more opposed to gays in the military than are whites.
.
What polls? When were they taken?
.
Links, please…

Sean:
.
Gays would require separate showers and barracks for the same reason women do. Can’t have the sexes mixing in a way that could possibly lead to sex. Harassment claims and all that.
.
Is that merely a matter of poorly designed or implemented policy?
.
Is the statute or regulation unclear enough to cause bad policy that focuses on ass-covering?
.
Do also you happen to know if this is how the Israelis operate, btw?

Stuart – I have no idea how the Israelis handle it. Mostly this stuff would be implemented for ass-covering purposes. But also for harassment claims/issues.
-
Paul – I don’t care. Reality and Officiality are two entirely different things. Officially gay service members means official policies on showers, housing, and everything else.
-
Jay – I have no idea how it’ll work. I’m just glad I’m not the one who’ll have to write the regs on it. Probably a pretty crap work group to get assigned to.

Schroedinger’s Soldier, until observed outside of his service in the army, he exists in a quantum state of being gay, being straight, and being all shades in between at the same time.

One of these days, the military will grow up and treat their personnel as adults, capable of acting like adults. My guess is that day will come when the ultra-conservative leaders have finally been pushed out for violating the first amendment rights of military personnel (Freedom of religion). But until that happy day, I expect the military will continue treating the volunteers who want to serve America with the same respect for personal choices and inherent traits as any rabid dog gets – none.

It seems to me that Sean was talking about how the brass is likely to react, not how his preferred policy would work.

[...] Here’s the February 11 Swampland blog post in full, entitled, "They Didn’t Ask, She Didn’t Tell, and Yet…": [...]

carpevis – I think that’s mighty optimistic. From what I understand of American military history, the military has never been overly concerned with accomodating people’s lifestyles.
.
And given that top brass refuse to budge on things like the V-22 Osprey, which actively kills its operators and crew, I don’t expect them to give in on sexual orientation.

Paul Dirk says: “It would appear that the knowlege (sic)of someone’s orientation appears more dangerous than that orientation itself. Interesting.”

Paul, if you didn’t understand that knowledge is dangerous you should ask for a refund for all education you ever paid for.

So, if I as a young male, tell you and your daughter/niece that I am gay so it is OK if we shower together or sleep in the same room, do you think that will make her feel more comfortable?

Grow up and acknowledge people’s prejudices. Work with them, not by ramming things down their throats. Otherwise, please stay out of the way because your sarcastic and specious statements cause more harm than good.

How is this any different than the bigoted and ignorant attitudes towards blacks in the military? 60-70yrs ago blacks couldnt serve with whites but eventually the military got over it. Got over it so well that a black man rose to one of the military’s highest positions – head of the Joint Chiefs.
My point is that people need to get over their prejudices and ignorances – especially those derived from texts that are prejudiced in themselves as well as extremely outdated. And the fear of being preyed upon by a gay person just because you are the same sex is about as ignorant as accusing every man on earth of preying on women and vice versa.

We need to get Katy Perry on this — I kissed a troop and I liked it!

Sean:
.
Thanks very much for your response.

Uh, excuse my ignorance on this separate-shower thingy, but wouldn’t that be putting together the people who might WANT to have sex with each other? Instead of putting gay men with straight men in whom they presumably have no interest?

Unless you’re going with that old homophobe myth about gay man all being a danger to poor widdle straight men.

As a woman I probably would feel uncomfortable showering with a gay man myself, simply from social conditioning. At the same time, I hate showering with women, too, straight or lesbian. So if I have to shower with somebody, I might as well shower with women (including any lesbians in the crowd) and leave all the men, gay and straight, to shower together …

… just like they do now.

Sheesh…there’s always a post that is going to drag me out of the Internet closet. Gee thanks Amy!
-
Having said that, let me tell you how much of a joke DADT is. If the idea is to keep gays out of the military, it’s a miserable failure. I personally know both enlisted grunts and officers who are all gay. They are only worried about being found out on their down time, and all of them know full well how to play the game. Hell my ex was AD Army for years when I first met him. Removing DADT is simply acknowledging reality and not drumming out good soldiers who happen to love their own gender.
-
BTW Amy you’re getting better on your subject matter I must say!

File under: More reasons not to go to Wall-Mart
And: MySpace is everybody’s space

This has nothing to do with “gay rights” or any such gibberish.

It has everything to do with liberals decimating the military — which is predominantly HETEROSEXUAL and not for meddling, myopic “change”, no matter what Code Pinkos wish upon the troops.

One way to end war would be to gay up the forces, of course.

Since there’d be nobody straight remaining to fight along the Bruce Falanche Brigades.

They used to call that unilateral surrender, back when it counted.

Gays equating their “struggle” to American blacks IS the biggest insult to a major minority since BJ Clixon was declared the First Rwandan President.

hulagate, what about all those military translators that have been dismissed because they’re gay?
.
Why do you hate the military? Why do you want to cripple it?

The Way We Weird…

http://www.woodtv.com/dpp/news/CMU_womens_coach_sued_by_explayer

YOU GO GIRL.

Hula is now officially in pointing and laughing territory. The toughest Marine I know (and trust me this guy is TOUGH) is also gay and would thump you into your next two lives. And he’s a damn good Marine to boot. But obviously your masculinity is threatened by gay men so much that maybe you have deep-seated issues you should discuss with a shrink.

“hulagate, what about all those military translators that have been dismissed because they’re gay?”

What’s your point?

That the Army’s now the rightful suppository, er, depositary for liberal social meddling, for the AIDS mob’s benefit?

That the 2 Mommies system is supposed to be the new DOD family status quo?

I DON’T THINK SO.

The RULES apply when you sign up.

Anyone not in compliance should be subject to PROSECUTION.

Liberals really need to THINK what the hell they’re expecting, should this MORONIC idea get Obama’s wink & nod.

You’ll have DROVES of senior NCO’s, their charges, brigade and company CO’s, and flag officers retiring in numbers that will make Clinton’s Hollow Army decade look like a draft board.

BTW: They move people out of the military for all kinds of stuff (crime, insubordination, medical problems, mental health) — the emphasis being the UNIT READINESS, not any individual personal problems. We need to concentrate on recruiting, training, equipping, and leading capable people — not charity cases, not head cases, not social experimenters that seek military service for the perks more than the work (and that includes the community college crowd whining about not expecting to have to go to war when they re-upped in 1998).

This issue is a non-starter, and will do irreparable damage to troop morale if and when instituted.

You’ve been advised.

yutsano

…

I don’t give a rat’s ashhat what cable channel you enjoy — and the vast majority of DOD members are adamantly OPPOSED to gays in the armed services (much less the intelligence corps).

They are simply more subject to every kind of coercion possible, are by our major American medical history major expenses, require unknown amounts of coddling above & beyond the normal soldier, and are by & large (when large) UNHAPPY people.

Honestly, off Broadway, how many really happy gay people have you ever met or known?

I find most of them to be miserable human beings, in every respect.

And that includes some close friends (that I pray for, whether they like it or not).

That’s not loathing.

That’s just the natural truth.

http://www.woodtv.com/dpp/news/CMU_womens_coach_sued_by_explayer

hulagate, all I’m saying is that you hate the military and you want our soldiers to be limbless cripples because they can’t understand what their guides are saying.

They are simply more subject to every kind of coercion possible, are by our major American medical history major expenses, require unknown amounts of coddling above & beyond the normal soldier, and are by & large (when large) UNHAPPY people.
.
Honestly, off Broadway, how many really happy gay people have you ever met or known?
.
I find most of them to be miserable human beings, in every respect.
.
And that includes some close friends (that I pray for, whether they like it or not).
.
That’s not loathing.
.
That’s just the natural truth.
.
QH:
.
You will please recall that I have defended you on this blog against all kinds of charges, i.e. “Racist! Anti-Semite!” that attacked your character, simply because you used language in a way that those folks found offensive.
.
I mention this because it’s important that you understand that I’m not saying what I’m about to say because I aspire to be the thought or language police. I truly do not wish to suppress your commentary or dissent from consensus opinion, and I would vigorously defend your right to speak your mind in public.
.
That said, I just wish that you would really –really– take a look at what you’ve written about a whole group of people, substitute the word “conservative” for “gay“, and then tell me how your comments conform to what we believe here in America: that individuals are to be judged according to their individual character –and not to be assigned group identity from which character judgments can be formed.
.
Please, honestly look at what you think about gay people as a group, and tell me with integrity that these thoughts aren’t informed by simple prejudice.
.
I can’t believe that you would truly throw away that bedrock principle of what it means to be an American –that we claim to know individual merit, and not collective identity– in such a thoughtless manner.
.
Isn’t that what being an American is all about –that we don’t just toss out with certainty assumptions like “most Black people steal” or “most Jewish people are cheapskates” or “most gay people are miserable human beings, in every respect“?
.
How can you call yourself an American, and subscribe to such obvious prejudice, QH?

Back to my first rule of blogging: DNFTT. Do not interact with Hula in any way, shape, or form.
-
Incidentally, I’m gay, single and quite happy.

yutsano, congratulations. How do you be happy in the face of the hula crowd, God’s admonitions in Liviticus, and the fact that this issue still exists in polite civilized society (not to mention the democratic free society thing)? Do you smoke something special perhaps?

I can’t see any link between happiness and a person’s sexual orientation. Your life is what you make of it. Individual circumstances like health, your job, your ability to provide for yourself and your family, your outlook on life…those are the things that determine how happy you are. IMHO, rascism, bigotry, intolerance and ignorance are products of low self-esteem and a need to think that there is a class of people lower than yourself.

sacredh, I agree and pat you in a friendly, nonsexual way, on the back. But give me a break, I was joking. Is this no laughing matter? I guess it depends on the crowd.

formerlyjames: Yes, I took your post as the joke it was intended to be. I was taking a load of laundry out midpost and yours hadn’t been posted yet. Yours showed up after I submitted (there’s an innuendo). I was ranting about the serious anti-gay previous posts.

Out: ARMY STRONG
…………….

Really Out: WE’RE FIERCE,
WE’RE FLAMING,
WE’RE REALLY ENTERTAINING,
WE’RE THE OBAMA FIGHTING FISSURES RANGERETTES

Zech:

The U.S. Army is not a proving ground for civilian social justice experiments.

It is a unique institution devoted to the lawful armed combat defense of the nation and our allies.

The law states that gays are not welcome in the armed forces, for a host of reasons some of which I’ve highlighted above and to the predictable hysteria of the loon left, but no worse for the supple projection of lefty paranoia. ["As you know, Chet, gay military members will return from Pakistan dead or alive via the Presidio instead of Dover, to accommodate their next-of-spa."]

We should not sacrifice the greater good — the preservation and growth of the country — to some G-D insertion of a hyper-minority’s sex habits and queer requirements (medical, mental, emotional, shower stall, hair care, whatever). High maintenance does not work in the field, nor does the massive costs it would take to accommodate such change for the sake of change alone.

If you want to FLAME ON, join the friggin Peace Corps or Americorps or Abortionists Without Borders. There are plenty of wealthy NGO’s to help destroy, instead of the American military’s readiness to do battle when the political and Pentagon leadership so directs. Or I hear Obama’s new & improved CIA is hiring.

Anyone in the “gay community” (a very special interest group if ever there was one) that thinks there’s some moral equivalence between “gay rights” and what the blacks suffered is smoking poles of bad Olympic bongwater.

I’m sure some current or former flag officer (I’m thinking old Navy here) will come out of the closest and go balls to the wall to prop up Obama’s gayest quota of dumb intentions — and I’m just as sure that such a display will be roundly opposed by the vast majority of military service vets, active members, and their families. Not that the MSM will cover it above the fold.

Is there room for “gay contributors” to our national defense?

Sure there is.

That does not include the Fort Knox barracks, Abrahms tank, Bradley fighting vehicle, or Trident submarine.

BTW: I’m also opposed to women in the combat theater, and pacifists in the JAG and chaplain corps.

I know.

I’m a crude SOB.

I also happen to be right.

hula, I have to violate the admonitions to not feed the trols and tell you that you do give me comic relief from the serious discussions here. Thanks.

formerlyjames: I apologize if you thought my rant was directed at you. It wasn’t. Well, I’m off to bed. I had to take a sleeping pill because I called the lottery commission today and they told me the check had already been cut and sent. There’s no way I could fall asleep on my own.

QH:
.
Thanks for the cogent reply.
.
The U.S. Army is not a proving ground for civilian social justice experiments.
.
I’ll end on this:
.
The Armed Forces of the United States of America are strong enough as institutions to, and are peopled with individuals capable and dedicated enough to survive all the way down the road to continuted honor and excellence when laws change and gay people can serve honestly with fellow patriots.
.
What you call a “social justice experiment” is what others called desegregation.
.
I (and a great majority of Americans) simply do not believe that this sort of confidence in our military is unwarranted, and that the services are not full of the kind of weak, fragile, frightened, brainless little hamsters that couldn’t handle the situation, and would forget all about their duty.

Incidentally, I’m gay, single and quite happy.
.
I’m betting the reason why hula only knows miserable gay people is because he makes everyone around him want to kill themselves.
Walking, talking cancers have a way of doing that, but they just don’t seem to realize it.

[...] original here: They Didn’t Ask, She Didn’t Tell, and Yet … (Time Magazine) Share and [...]