The US Military and the Homos

Next day.


The large scale survey that the Pentagon took revealed that, overall, about 60% of the military don't have a problem serving with homosexuals, even if they regard the behavior as religiously or morally unacceptable. (This means that 4 out of 10 do have a problem.) The report suggests that letting gays serve openly would not be much of a problem, nothing that the services could not handle, given the right strategies and a little time. When you look at specifics, frontline troops are less sanguine about this and Marines are uneasy about it at a rate of 60%.

And having Lady Gaga demonstrate...well that's almost reason by itself to keep DADT in place. It's precisely the effeminate, boundary-breaking behavior that gay culture celebrates which proved to be the most frequently mentioned objection to repeal.

Repeatedly, we heard Service members express the view that “open” homosexuality would lead to widespread and overt displays of effeminacy among men, homosexual promiscuity, harassment and unwelcome advances within units, invasions of personal privacy, and an overall erosion of standards of conduct, unit cohesion, and morality. (DADT Report p 5 and a thankful HT to Eliot Riffler)

The report's writers kindly assess this as misperception and stereotypical thinking, but, come on, as we all know, stereotypes are offensive precisely because they contain unpleasant truths. But would this kind of homo be drawn to military life? You certainly hope not.  But cf, Bradley Manning.

I am not in favor of repealing DADT unless it serves the military or at the very least does not inhibit its mission. If they come to the decision that it would be a good thing, then I'm for it.  I know some gay soldiers who have served honorably and even heroically, with great sacrifice. I would like their service to be recognized. But that sentiment is not a sufficient reason to make a whole policy. 

I would be very happy if the services were for it, and for a specific reason of mine. Unlike gay activism about a lot of other societal structures, which wants to transform and deconstruct the traditional institution to make homosexuals comfortable and "equal", the dismantling of DADT would allow --I hope-- men who want to let themselves be transformed by a traditional institution do so. I want it to be possible for gay men to become soldiers without having to hide, not to homosexualize the military. As long as the military is ok with it and the guys who join the military want to become soldiers, to adapt and become part of the preexisting tradition and not dismantle it, then it's a win-win.

Congressional Republicans remain agin it. Even though the responses from the military are, unsurprisingly, mixed, the opening comes from within, not imposed. I like that. The process is important to the final success of the outcome. We'll see how it finally pans out.

PS A commenter on another site has read through the document and holds that the contents do not actually support the conclusions, that there is quite significant resistance to the idea of out gays in the military.