Obama and the Gay Military...

[Aitch]

So, according to this BBC News page, Obama is going to have a go at getting rid of the Don't Ask, Don't Tell situation.

Will he succeed?

 

[Darat]

I'm not going to tell you.

 

[skeptifem]

No, because he didn't understand how homophobic most of the military is. It will not work. You cannot make these people accept gays, and I suspect an attempt to do so will end in a lot of violence against the out gay people. I don't know if it will actually get to that point though, Obama seems to be facing a lot of real life limitations on his ambitious idealistic plans and this certainly counts as one of them.

 

[Undesired Walrus]

No, because he didn't understand how homophobic most of the military is. It will not work. You cannot make these people accept gays, and I suspect an attempt to do so will end in a lot of violence against the out gay people.

A similar argument could be made about preventing blacks from serving in the military in the early 20th Century. It would be wrong though.

If these homophobes have a problem with it, tough. Such immaturity shouldn't be tolerated. The army is currently fighting against extreme homophobia in Afghanistan, amongst other things.

 

[Aitch]

A similar argument could be made about preventing blacks from serving in the military in the early 20th Century. It would be wrong though.

And, more recently, women on the front line?

Another question occurs to me.

What percentage of the American military is gay? And what would happen, if Obama's initiative fails, if all the gays stood up to be counted and were heaved out of the Services?

 

[skeptifem]

A similar argument could be made about preventing blacks from serving in the military in the early 20th Century. It would be wrong though.

If these homophobes have a problem with it, tough. They shouldn't be in the military if they are so immature.

Well, I don't really think the race comparison stands. A voluntary military automatically means that it will be, for the most part, composed of poor people, who are more often not white. The military could not survive as well without black/hispanic/non white people. They can certainly get by without gays, which happen too make up more of populations like the mentally ill but are otherwise a proportionately similar population in most other groups you can survey. their portion of the population of those other ethnic/economic/gender groups tends to fall under 10%, so other than alientating the homophobic undereducated poor people you aren't going to accomplish a whole lot by letting gays in. It seems to me like they would lose a lot more people than they would gain, or they would gain a lot of inner military violence if the people already in the military weren't willing to leave.

Looking at the kind of pressure that non christians face in the military recently is enough proof that non official pressures can be extreme and pervasive in all parts of the military; I don't know why a similar experience would not await openly gay military people. like a jewish member of the air force being given a non kosher MRA, and when he refused to eat it he got reported for mental illness due to his 'anorexic tendancies'. There are a million and one ways to **** with anyone in an organization with so many regulations, and a widespread demand for conformity.

 

[Garrette]

Well, I don't really think the race comparison stands.

It does.

A voluntary military automatically means that it will be, for the most part, composed of poor people, who are more often not white. The military could not survive as well without black/hispanic/non white people.

According to the Offfice of Army Demographics website, in FY08 72.9% of commissioned officers, 62.5% of warrant officers, and 61.1% of enlisted personnel were white. Your "for the most part, composed of poor people, who are more often not white" may be good ideology, but it's certainly not good research.

They can certainly get by without gays,

Then why aren't they banned outright? But assuming you are correct (and it is not as certain as you claim), we can also get by without atheists. Let's put in an equivalent policy for them.

which happen to make up more of populations like the mentally ill

More talking out of orifices besides the mouth?

but are otherwise a proportionately similar population in most other groups you can survey.

What are you saying? That for groups besides the non-mentally ill, gays make up a small but consistent portion, and for the mentally ill they make up a larger portion? Please do show the numbers.

Show it for the poor, too, since that's how you started your point.

their portion of the population of those other ethnic/economic/gender groups tends to fall under 10%,

I think you're correct, but a source would be nice.

so other than alientating the homophobic undereducated poor people you aren't going to accomplish a whole lot by letting gays in.

Besides removing an undeserved stigma and outing the homophobic population? Do you have data that indicate such alienation would result in lowered performance by the military as a whole?

It seems to me like they would lose a lot more people than they would gain, or they would gain a lot of inner military violence if the people already in the military weren't willing to leave.

"Seems" is a poor way to decide policy.

Lifting the ban on gays would cause strife and turmoil, but it would not last; the integration of military units did not cause the downfall of military efficiency or effectiveness, despite strong fears to the contrary.

Looking at the kind of pressure that non christians face in the military recently is enough proof that non official pressures can be extreme and pervasive in all parts of the military;

Yes, of course. Successfully combating such pressure includes an official change, not acquiescence.

I don't know why a similar experience would not await openly gay military people.

Perhaps it would, for some and for a while.

like a jewish member of the air force being given a non kosher MRA, and when he refused to eat it he got reported for mental illness due to his 'anorexic tendancies'.

And what was the result of that incident, beyond the initial headline?

There are a million and one ways to **** with anyone in an organization with so many regulations, and a widespread demand for conformity.

And so we turn national policy over to the tides of organizational culture.

Got it.


I have had this discussion several times with my fellow military members, occasionally heatedly. It always gets down to one thing to which the anti-openly-gay crowd has no adequate response:

Your objection, then, is not at all related to whether or not a gay person can do the jobs required in the military. It is, instead, based entirely on the supposition that you and people with your viewpoint will behave to a lower standard. Sounds like a problem with you, and one that I don't want in my military. Sounds like it's time for you to leave.

Edited for grammar and spelling

 

[Darat]

No, because he didn't understand how homophobic most of the military is. It will not work. You cannot make these people accept gays, and I suspect an attempt to do so will end in a lot of violence against the out gay people. I don't know if it will actually get to that point though, Obama seems to be facing a lot of real life limitations on his ambitious idealistic plans and this certainly counts as one of them.

Disagree - a similar restriction was lifted in the UK and it doesn't seem to have caused any breakdown in the effectiveness of the UK military. Which is hardly surprising since even when it was illegal homosexuals still served.

 

[Dancing David]

It will happen more slowly than i would like, do to the stupid fracas on teh sidelines.

In combat you don't give a crap, your fellow soldiers either does what theya re supposed to or they don't.

religous prejudice is crap.

 

[Tsukasa Buddha]

How did he find out about our secret military... I mean...

He already made that promise, and then we found out that it would only happen after the wars are over, and if we aren't involved in any more .

 

[Darat]

It will happen more slowly than i would like, do to the stupid fracas on teh sidelines.

In combat you don't give a crap, your fellow soldiers either does what theya re supposed to or they don't.

religous prejudice is crap.

In the UK it took nine years from the ban being lifted to this: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/new...-with-gay-serviceman-in-Soldier-magazine.html

ETA: More in depth report: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...rces-finally-leant-to-take-pride-1762057.html

 

[Undesired Walrus]

Well, I don't really think the race comparison stands. A voluntary military automatically means that it will be, for the most part, composed of poor people, who are more often not white. The military could not survive as well without black/hispanic/non white people. They can certainly get by without gays, which happen too make up more of populations like the mentally ill but are otherwise a proportionately similar population in most other groups you can survey.

Even if the % of black recruits was very small, it wouldn't change anything. Saying 'We can get by without the blacks, and it is better we do not disrupt the cohesion of the mostly white, middle class armed forces by letting them in' would be utterly unacceptable coming from a miliatary wishing to set an example to the rest of the world.

It should be the bigots who aren't tolerated, not the other way round.

 

[Akhenaten]

My experience in the ARA, which ended mid-nineties, was that sometimes you knew, sometimes you didn't.

It didn't matter.

I'm hetero and had many friends who were other. No difference that I could see, and we saw a lot of each other.


Cheers,

WO2 Dave

 

[quarky]

An elite, all-gay division of troops would be handy.

 

[Undesired Walrus]

In the UK it took nine years from the ban being lifted to this: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/new...-with-gay-serviceman-in-Soldier-magazine.html

ETA: More in depth report: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...rces-finally-leant-to-take-pride-1762057.html

Today, uniformed Armed Forces personnel march at Gay Pride and a few months ago, the outgoing head of the British Army, General Sir Richard Dannatt, became the first to address a Lesbian, Gay, Bi-sexual and Transgender conference, telling delegates: "respect for others is not an optional extra."

Very true.

 

[Z]

My experience over ten years of service is that gays existed in larger numbers than most people realize in the military... and when you found out who was gay and who wasn't, you didn't give a crap. They were either good soldiers, or they weren't; they either had your back, or they didn't. Oh, there might be a few incidents at first, but they'd eventually taper off and vanish, and the military would be all the stronger for it over time.

 

[Garrette]

they either had your back, or they didn't.

that's the problem!!!!!

Gayz!!!

 

[fls]

My experience over ten years of service is that gays existed in larger numbers than most people realize in the military... and when you found out who was gay and who wasn't, you didn't give a crap. They were either good soldiers, or they weren't; they either had your back, or they didn't. Oh, there might be a few incidents at first, but they'd eventually taper off and vanish, and the military would be all the stronger for it over time.

I saw "Milk" recently, and a point was made by the main character in the movie that it was only by allowing marginalization that fear and loathing could be maintained. If it's out in the open, it becomes increasingly difficult for homophobes to dehumanize their next-door-neighbour, one of their close friends, their family doctor, and their daughter's drum teacher, etc.

Linda

 

[Alt+F4]

And what would happen, if Obama's initiative fails, if all the gays stood up to be counted and were heaved out of the Services?

What initiative? All I heard was blah, blah, blah. No plan, no timeline, just tossing a bone to the stupid gays who still support him and keep ignoring the coming realization that Obama could care less.

 

[shemp]

I'm not going to tell you.

I won't ask.

Also, this seems like an appropriate time for a video: