[Note: On November 29^th, the Pentagon released its report. Gays and lesbians should be allowed to serve openly in the military. Now it’s up to Congress.]

By now every nation which does not criminalize homosexuality except the United States allows gays, lesbians and bisexuals to serve openly in its armed services. Here we have a policy known as “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” (DADT), instituted by President Clinton in 1994 as a compromise measure. He had promised in his campaign to end all restrictions on the sexual orientation of military personnel. However, when it had come to funding military spending the previous year, Congress had included provisions in the National Defense Authorization Act that overrode that promise. That homosexuals could, did, and do serve openly in Congress made no difference. The first irony.

Under DADT, when a person enlists in the military, his or her superiors are forbidden to ask about sexual orientation. Thus, the person is not required to lie in order to serve. It follows that the person must lie for the duration of his or her service, so a single untold truth inevitably leads to an untold number of lies. The second irony.

The policy obviously implies that nothing stands in the way of a closeted homosexual being a good soldier. The fear is that other soldiers knowing there is a homosexual in their midst poses “an unacceptable risk to the high standards of morale, good order and discipline, and unit cohesion that are the essence of military capability.” In other words, what you don’t know can’t hurt you. We call that military intelligence. The third irony.

The defenders of DADT may honestly believe this desire for ignorance is motivated solely by concern for troop morale and effectiveness. There can be little doubt, however, that their primary motivation is homophobia. Polls have consistently shown that serving alongside gays and lesbians is a non-issue for our soldiers (they think it would have no impact); it is estimated that 65 thousand homosexuals currently serve, there are over a million gay veterans, and their presence has had no such adverse effect on any army on earth. Yet many of our highest ranking officers dismiss what are undeniable facts because they lack the courage to face up to their own prejudice. The fourth irony. (That Congress resists doing away with DADT in spite of those polls is the fifth irony.)

But do closeted homosexuals make good soldiers? What about their morale? The majority of psychologists agree and all the closeted present and former servicepersons interviewed state that the pressure to hide their orientation puts them under an enormous amount of stress – they do not even dare designate their partners as the person to inform if they are killed or wounded – and interferes, often severely, with their effectiveness in training and combat. (Need I add that no uncloseted soldiers have been interviewed?) The sixth irony.

Let me add here that barring homosexuals from our military goes back to before there was a United States. On March 15th, 1778, George Washington discharged a certain Lieutenant Enslin for having discharged or attempting to discharge into a person of the wrong gender (an irony unrelated to DADT), and ordered him literally “drummed out” in a public spectacle at Valley Forge. The troops must have appreciated the diversion. It was a hard winter.

Until 1947, soldiers discovered to be homosexual were usually discharged quietly, and not “dishonorably”. Psychiatry had by then been recognized as a science, and homosexuality was considered a mental illness. The American Psychiatric Association and American Psychological Association reversed their positions in 1973 and 1975, respectively, and no longer see it as an abnormality. In their official opinion, pathological symptoms diagnosed in homosexuals either bear no relation to their sexuality or are caused by the stress and abuse societal homophobia subjects them to. (This is still the sixth irony.)

When resistance to the draft reached its peak during the Vietnam War, the Pentagon wisely turned a blind eye to the many homosexuals it knew to be serving there in order to fill the ranks. The war safely over, in 1982 the Defense Department issued a directive declaring homosexuals unfit for military service. It appears our generals are confident we can win in Iraq, Afghanistan – and Iran, too, if it comes to that – without compromising the integrity of the American military. Good luck to them! (That was irony number seven.)

To return to DADT, the policy simply doesn’t work; it protects no one. More people have been outed and discharged from the service for homosexuality since it came into effect than ever before. The eighth irony.

DADT has consistently had a negative impact on the capabilities of the American military. To cite two examples, the army has spent millions of dollars to train replacements for the increased number of discharged personnel. (The Pentagon’s fiscal irresponsibility is too egregious and widespread to tie specifically to the ironies of DADT.)

Now for the second example. By 2004 the Army had given dishonorable discharges to 20 Arabic and 7 Farsi translators for homosexual orientation (not behavior) under DADT, and as of 2007 the number of Arabic translators let go had risen to 58. That anyone would for patriotic reasons put the security of the nation at risk is the ninth irony.

Bible-thumping fundamentalists would have us believe that God will withhold victory from our glorious armies for as long as we allow homosexuals in the ranks. That He will align himself with terrorists and unbelievers and utterly destroy the righteous because a minority of His people are less than righteous is the tenth irony, but not without Biblical precedent. On the other hand, He allowed Lot and his family to escape the destruction of Sodom and put only one small vessel in danger because Jonah was on board, trying in vain to avoid having to carry out His orders. We may explain little David’s victory over the giant Goliath by the fact that the future King of Israel had not yet met Jonathan. As for David’s later victories, we can only assume he didn’t tell. (God did eventually punish him for encompassing the death of Uriah, a heterosexually motivated sin. In short, basing any logical argument on Biblical authority is a hopeless undertaking.)

I see I have digressed again.

Barack Obama has vowed to do away with DADT. His most outspoken opponent in the Senate has been John McCain, who in February of this year presented a letter to Secretary of Defense Robert Gates and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff signed by “over a thousand former … officers” arguing for the retention of DADT. The veterans’ group Servicemembers United found a number of officers who had never heard of such a letter among the signatures and that the average age of the signees, actual and supposed, was 78. In response to McCain’s plea that we “benefit from [their] experience and knowledge”, they point out that “only a small fraction of these officers have even served in the military during the ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ period, much less in the 21st century military.” There are too many ironies here to count, so I’ll just call them the eleventh. The twelfth is that, in spite of the fiasco of leaving health care reform up to the legislative branch of government, President Obama still wants Congress to take the initiative, something it hasn’t done in years, and as my thirteenth irony, he continues to instruct the Justice Department to support DADT in the courts.

I think I’ll leave it at an even baker’s dozen.

Letters:

From Phillip:

Dear Stanley

I am an openly gay sailor serving in the Royal Australian Navy, I have just read your rant on DADT.  Of course to me you make perfect sense.  I just don't understand why it doesn't make sense to your homophobic congress.
 
I have twice been involved with the US Navy on exercise both at sea and ashore. It was disappointing to see how my gay compatriots lived.  A world of secrecy, stress and of never being able to love openly.  I always think of one of my favourite movie quotes 'a life lived in fear is a life only half lived' (Strictly Ballroom 1992).
 
I don't know your background but your sympathy for my gay servicemen and women of the US is appreciated by this sailor down-under.
 
Cheers and Merry Christmas
Phillip

 

Wilde Oats is published three times a year, in April, August and December. Click here to be automatically informed of new issues when they are published.