ultimatebrokebackforum.com forum

THE GAY EXPERIENCE => Gay, Bi, Whatever (Gay-Friendly Always Welcome) => Topic started by: mountain boy on April 04, 2006, 03:39:43 PM

Title: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays & the military--ARCHIVED
Post by: mountain boy on April 04, 2006, 03:39:43 PM
A few of us found ourselves talking about this kind of stuff lately. If a thread hasn't yet been created for it, here's a place.

If we've gone 4 months without getting into this topic then congrats to us!
Title: Re: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lola on April 04, 2006, 03:46:33 PM
Good idea, I just hope it stays civil.  I know people have very different ideas about the military in general.  And I have very strong opinions.  Maybe I can lurk!  ;)
Title: Re: If the army don't get me: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Casper on April 04, 2006, 10:11:07 PM
Let's see....the late Barry Goldwater had this to say about gays in the military.....

"You don't have to be straight, you just have to shoot straight."

Title: Re: If the army don't get me: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Willhoite on April 04, 2006, 10:46:15 PM
When Jack Twist told Ennis, "if the Army don't get me," it was a time period when poor boys were starting to be drafted.

It seems like in the early 1960s, even before the Vietnam "war" started, they were drafing people with possible plans to go to war.

My cousin who was 2 1/2 years older than men was drafted while I was going to college in 1963. My older brother, who was six months younger than our cousin, did not get drafted because he had heart problems.

And, after 1965, the local draft board seemed to want to get the boys and men, no matter how educated they were, from the lower middle and lower income areas of town. When I was in Vietnam in 1967, there were at least 4 of us who had not only gone to the same high school at the same time but the same church who were in the same Army Brigade. All of us were college grads and still drafted.
Title: Re: If the army don't get me: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: ImEnnisShesJack on April 05, 2006, 07:13:22 AM
I've always kind of thought it funny that the military was so "militantly' anti-gay and "don't ask-don't tell" and yet most of my gay friends in college and post-college were ex-marines (huh - no message there).  Is there a connection?  Is there a reason why so many gays are in the military?  Am I just being really thick headed and blonde?

(Okay, I get it that it's like ALL GUYS, but not ALL GUYS are gay..so?  WHat gives?)
Title: Re: If the army don't get me: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: mcnell1120 on April 05, 2006, 09:19:48 AM
Let's see....the late Barry Goldwater had this to say about gays in the military.....

"You don't have to be straight, you just have to shoot straight."



Right on man....and don't matter if you're a gal neither.....the gun has no discriminations !!
Title: Re: If the army don't get me: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Willhoite on April 05, 2006, 10:52:28 AM
I've always kind of thought it funny that the military was so "militantly' anti-gay and "don't ask-don't tell" and yet most of my gay friends in college and post-college were ex-marines (huh - no message there).  Is there a connection?  Is there a reason why so many gays are in the military?  Am I just being really thick headed and blonde?

(Okay, I get it that it's like ALL GUYS, but not ALL GUYS are gay..so?  WHat gives?)

When I was on active duty in the US Army (July 26, 1966 through July 25, 1968), I was in denial of my sexual orientation. When I was in Vietnam (Feb 67 - Feb 68), I was a clerk-typist in the Staff Judge Advocate Section (I worked for JAG officers) at HQ. First, I was with the 196th Light Infantry Brigade. The 196th was at Tay Ninh, NW of Saigon near the Cambodian border when I arrived in-country and then a couple of months later it moved up north to Chu Lai, on the coast of the South China Sea. Actually, the Brigade HQ was not on the coast because the Marine Air Base was between it and the ocean. We were up on a hill above Highway 1.

I knew of only one court-martial involving a "sodomy" case and that was while I was with the 196th. I did see the guy who got convicted because his "escort" brought him to the office for some paper work before he was to go down to Saigon on the way back to the States. The guy was somewhat cocky and immature. Why he would want to have sex in one of those latrines was beyond me. I put "escort" in quotes; because my "gaydar" sensed that the guy taking him South was not exactly straight in his sexual orientation either.

The odd part about the guy's case is that nothing even happened to the guy who consented to the act with the convicted one. He was just as guilty and he was not even charged.

When the 196th was moved up to replace the Marines north of Chu Lai so that the Marine units could advance toward the DMZ, most of those of us who worked in HQ sections with the 196th were transferred to HQ Americal Division at Chu Lai. I was at Chu Lai during the Tet Holiday Offensive of 1968.

Speaking of Marines, when I lived out in the San Fernando Valley of LA, I saw a newspaper article about the Marine Commandant over the San Diego area bases complaing to the California Attorney General about young marines making gay porno movies in San Diego. The AG told that complaining Marine, in words to this effect (that's a JAG expression for an indirect quote considered equal to an actual quote), "While sodomy might be illegal with the US Military, consensual same sex activity is not illegal in California and that includes the making of pornography by and for adults."
Title: Re: If the army don't get me: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: rob7 on April 05, 2006, 05:56:39 PM
Willhoite,
You and I were in Nam at the same time.   I was stationed around Saigon, and there was never a lack of sex,
boy...could I write a book    :D :)
Title: Re: If the army don't get me: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Willhoite on April 05, 2006, 06:43:49 PM
When I was in the US Army (two years) and in Vietnam (1 year), during those years I was celibate because I was not married and I was chaste because I did not have sex during those two years. I was in denial of my sexual orientation.

When I was in "Nam, there were legally married men who went on R&R to the places where they could get sex with prostitutes. Some of them returned with photographic proof of their sexual activity with whores.

And, some of the guys there in 'Nam had movie projectors and showed heterosexual porn in the hooches (the buildings where we slept and spent time after work). Even commissioned officers showed up to view the stuff.

I did take my first R&R in Hawaii. And, I sorta dated a woman, Linda, whom I met a a church conference there. I say "sorta" because I got her brother, Jimmy, whom I liked very much, to bring her to where I was staying and we went shopping together. I became "pen pals" with the both of them which lasted about a year. The relationship with the both them was merely platonic; but, I sort of used the pics with myself and Linda as a "beard" for me in 'Nam.
Title: Re: If the army don't get me: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Dave Cullen on April 06, 2006, 11:40:03 AM
Ah, a subject near and dear to my heart.

Back in 2000, I spent 5 months working on a series for Salon called "Don't ask, don't tell, don't fall in love." Best thing I've ever written.

Links at the top of this page, if you're interested:

http://blogs.salon.com/0001137/stories/2003/06/16/linksToSomeOfMyBetterPublishedWork.html

(And I can give a brief update on the three captains, if people are interested.)
Title: Re: If the army don't get me: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: rob7 on April 06, 2006, 02:43:27 PM
Dave,
Thanks for the links.....   It's almost like reading my life story......you really got your facts right, and cqptured the
feelings that gay/bi officers have.  Yes would be interested on an update on the 3 captains.
(Captain)  Rob7 
Title: Re: If the army don't get me: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: mountain boy on April 06, 2006, 02:48:13 PM
Yes, definitely would like to hear the update Dave!
Title: Re: If the army don't get me: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Dave Cullen on April 07, 2006, 11:36:03 AM
The quick update:

They all were on three-year tours and transferred a couple times since.

Drake, the Marine. Real name John. He tried being more straight for a little while, got a girlfriend, finally figured out he was gay all the way. He got out about a year ago. Came back to live in Denver. He seems happy.

Publication of the story had a huge impact on the other two. Brought some things to the surface.

The filipino decided to give in to his father's wishes and agreed to an arranged marriage, with a woman flown in from Asia. That seemed fine at first, because the couple really hit it off. But before the marriage, she figured it out, it blew up in his face, almost ended his career, but caused him to finally see how ridiculous the whole thing was. He told his dad off, and they eventually made their peace.

He has been doing great since, and plans to stay in for 20 years. He's had a couple lengthy boyfriends, though the moving every few years has hurt.

We stayed friends and he was actually just visiting. He's a great guy. He made major awhile back.

So did the other one, who was intent on making general (I forget the assumed names I gave them.)
 
That third guy made the most dramatic turnaround. He was kinda shocked to see himself in print, because he didn't like some of the picture. He thought it was dead-on, but . . . fucked up. He decided his priorities were out of whack, and he opened himself up to a relationship and found one rather quickly. He fell in love, and they have been together ever since. His boyfriend moved with him to his next station, and they bought a house together, and are basically married. I don't stay in close touch with him anymore, but last I heard, he was planning to get out fairly soon, when this tour ended. He wants to be a husband and be happy and be himself, and that's more important to himi than the army now.
Title: Re: If the army don't get me: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: rob7 on April 07, 2006, 01:04:33 PM
Thanks Dave,
I think it is great you have been able to stay in touch with the guys and see what different paths their lives take.
For the most part, most military guys think of themselves as "straight" while knowing deep in their hearts  that they
are gay or bi.  Having a relationship with another military guy is normally destined to be a short affair as the complications
of two guys from the same unit/duty station...is just to risky and cumbersome.

In overseas assignments, another thing I found interesting was the troops from gay friendly countries ( ie England, Australia, etc )
were great to be around and had none of the problems that US military personnel have with sex, regardless of their
orientation.

An Aussie Officer I know says that "it's a good thing you Yanks can fight, cause you sure as hell can't drink, .....and you have all
kinds of hangups about sex"

I guess thats the thought for the day  :)
Title: Re: If the army don't get me: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Willhoite on April 07, 2006, 02:13:09 PM
On topic here in relation to Jack Twist: If Jack had been drafted into the US Army, he would have had to spend two years active duty and then four years either in an Army Reserve Unit or have 4 years of inactive reserve status, subject to be recalled back to regular duty at any time.

In the 1960s in the USA, every young man who had reached the age 18 officially had a six-year obligation to serve in the US Military. Since the "Selective Service System" (aka draft boards) were rather selective, not everyone was called to serve even if they had to have a pre-induction physical with written exams to be taken.

If a person volunteered for active duty to begin with, he still had a 6 year obligation; but, he would have to serve 3 or more years of active duty with the rest inactive or in a reserve or national guard unit.

Jack was probably somewhat damaged physically before he even met Ennis in May 1963, since he had been riding bulls for a while.

Ennis probably got exempt from the draft because he got married and had a child in 1964.

But, if they had been in more or less physical shape when it came time for them to be drafted and they had no family obligations, they probably would have been drafted because of the socio-economic status as poor ranch boys. Some people have tried to claim that people were not drafted into the Army that way; but, I know better.

When I was in Vietnam with the 196th Light Infantry Brigade, most of the guys in my adminstration company who arrived in-country with the Brigade itself who were of the rank of E-4 (Specialst 4) by the time I got there were draftees. The majority of them were from lower-middle or lower-class backgrounds, even if they themselves had some college education.

From what I know about the "Uniform Code of Military Justice," (UCMJ) the laws which apply to all the US Military, the US Military is the only US Federal institution where it is still illegal to be homosexual.

When I was clerking for JAG officers, there was no "adultery" clause in the UCMJ, but there was a "sodomy" one.

Oh, while I was a college grad and had been a teacher for a year when I got my 2nd draft notice, I was not in very good physical shape and that was due to lack of physical activity and being overweight. I had got a teaching deferment after I got my first draft notice after college because I had already signed a teaching contract and the fact that I was a foreign language teacher helped even more. I chose not to teach again in the same town for a number of reasons which I won't go into here except they wanted me to stay on as a teacher.

When I got the 2nd draft notice, I was going to summer school and I was to report for duty before the end of the summer session. I talked to the Dean of Students and he told me that since my grades up to that point were "3.0," he would make sure that I got full credit for the 8 semester hours and I would be considered to be a student until the end of term, too.

It was interesting that I was in the US Army in Ft. Polk, Louisiana as a full-time active duty soldier and I was a full-time student at Northeastern State College back up in Tahlequah, Oklahoma, both at the same time.

It took a week to get fully processed into active duty and because I was in poor shape physcially, after the first week of basic training I was sent to an outfit with the official name of "Special Training Company" (STC). There were two kinds of people at STC, mental duds and physical duds (as we called them). Most of the "physical duds" had not only finished high school but had been to college, too. And, the average IQ of us physical duds was higher than most of the career NCOs in charge of our training. Us educated guys were allowed to assume leadership positions in the company when a person was transferred back to a regular basic training unit. Before I left, I was an Assistant Platoon Leader and in charge of the lower floor of the barracks where we stayed. STC had two platoons.

I was at STC for 6 weeks and then send back as a "recycle" to a unit which was beginning its 2nd week of basic training. So, it took me 14 weeks to complete 8 weeks of basic training. Since I did not choose to retake the test for Officers Candidate School, I was sent to clerk-typist training instead. At the end of the 8 weeks for that, I missed being first in the class by one point. I was sort of glad of that because I did not have to go up and salute the training brigade commander.
Title: Re: If the army don't get me: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Willhoite on April 07, 2006, 02:21:07 PM
When I was living in N. Hollywood in 1984, I worked for a temporary job agency as an office clerk in a files department down in a different section of LA. A guy who had been a temporary secretary for the lady who was over the department ended up joining us who were doing files conversion.

Larry was openly gay, too. He told me that he had been in the US Army and he had a lover relationship with his company commander (CO). When his CO got transfer orders to another unit, Larry decided that he would just tell the Army that he was gay so that he could move to be where his lover was. And in doing so, he got discharged from active duty. I am not sure what his official status was after he did that; but, I know that he didn't care.

It used to be that if a person was discharged because of homosexuality, either by sexual activity or just by admitting it, it would put a bad mark on his record and keep him from getting a good job in civilian life. But, anymore that does not matter. Unless it is for a civil service job, one's actions while on active duty have no bearing on one's employment.
Title: Re: If the army don't get me: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: billneill on April 07, 2006, 03:43:46 PM
First things first, BBM is NOT a gay film and NEITHER of the boys are gay! You may loose your virginity with one insertion, but you are not gay with one or more experiences with the same sex when you are ALSO a practicing heterosexual. The term is BISEXUAL. And no, it is not for cash, that is buysexual!

Lets clear this up. I am 70 and have been gay all my life, from 5 years on. Yep, I reached out and touched someones things back in the 1940s and was well into it in the 1950s, what a ride.

I joined the military because that is where the boys are! I did so good, had so much and so many, worked wonders for my promotions. I finished my tour of duty and was discharged.

So, I went to visit my service mates, all over the USA. What I could not understand was that they did not want anything to do with me. Why? I did not understand at all! My service mates had a need that was then, but was not the same later.

Frank, that was then, this is now, and the boys in BBM are just two men in a situation of mutual need that grows, and grows, and finally, morphs into something entirely different that it was at first.

Ennis would still be married to Alma had she not seen him with Jack! Think about it. Ennis is not the villain here, it is Alma, who has reservations and decided that a divorce was required. Her emotions simply could not be shared in a triangle.
Title: Re: If the army don't get me: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: All4one on April 07, 2006, 04:21:18 PM
That makes her a villain? Are you kidding? ???
Title: Re: If the army don't get me: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Darwin Dee on April 07, 2006, 07:42:21 PM
Wow you're 70? I'm 22, well met over the generation gap!

Ennis would still be married to Alma had she not seen him with Jack! Think about it. Ennis is not the villain here, it is Alma, who has reservations and decided that a divorce was required. Her emotions simply could not be shared in a triangle.

Alma is no villain, maybe victim but not villain. Actually i think everybody is a victim in the situation. They are coping as best they can with a situation they have no prior experience of and thus don't know how to handle it. Given this i think they do admirably. Alma and Ennis raise two stable and bright kids! That makes them heroes in my book!

Also I think Ang Lee makes it clear that Ennis is no longer interested in Alma sexually and this is the final straw for her. Hence the divorce.

I am bisexual and I was struck by the complexity of the emotional stories in the film, I liked that there were no villians, just people being and becoming...

The world is not black and white, there are no heroes or villains, just differing points of view.  :o


Title: Re: If the army don't get me: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: gn411 on April 12, 2006, 10:06:02 AM
When I was living in N. Hollywood in 1984, I worked for a temporary job agency as an office clerk in a files department down in a different section of LA. A guy who had been a temporary secretary for the lady who was over the department ended up joining us who were doing files conversion.

Larry was openly gay, too. He told me that he had been in the US Army and he had a lover relationship with his company commander (CO). When his CO got transfer orders to another unit, Larry decided that he would just tell the Army that he was gay so that he could move to be where his lover was. And in doing so, he got discharged from active duty. I am not sure what his official status was after he did that; but, I know that he didn't care.

It used to be that if a person was discharged because of homosexuality, either by sexual activity or just by admitting it, it would put a bad mark on his record and keep him from getting a good job in civilian life. But, anymore that does not matter. Unless it is for a civil service job, one's actions while on active duty have no bearing on one's employment.

As of 2000, the year I retired from the Navy,  Individuals discharged for being gay were given an "admin" discharge.  This type of discharge has no negitive conotations.  One could be discharged "Admin" for any number of reasons. 
Title: Re: If the army don't get me: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: gn411 on April 12, 2006, 10:07:32 AM
oops my response showed up in the quote, sorry, here goes:

As of 2000, the year I retired from the Navy,  Individuals discharged for being gay were given an "admin" discharge.  This type of discharge has no negitive conotations.  One could be discharged "Admin" for any number of reasons
Title: Re: If the army don't get me: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Willhoite on April 12, 2006, 12:07:41 PM
oops my response showed up in the quote, sorry, here goes:

As of 2000, the year I retired from the Navy,  Individuals discharged for being gay were given an "admin" discharge.  This type of discharge has no negitive conotations.  One could be discharged "Admin" for any number of reasons

When you quote an original message, type your response after the last bracket thing with "/quote" in it.

My younger sister was in the WACs before I was drafted. She got out with a "General Discharge Under Honorable Conditions" (I think that was the way that it was worded). And because she was a Vietnam Era Veteran, she gets her Social Security Disability Pension supplemented with a VA Non-Service-Connected Disability Pension. That type of VA pension is sort of like Social Security's SSI payments because it guarantees a mininum income for a veteran.

I actually get the same total amount of money that she gets; except now I am not on SS disability because I am 63 and my SS benefits are actually less than hers for a number of reasons.

It used to be that one had to be from the Vietnam Era to get the VA pension of that type; but, if a person is getting less than the total amount of what the VA pension pays from Social Security and he (or she) is on Social Security, the person can ask for the VA benefit supplement, too. Years ago, on America Online, I helped a man in his 70s who was a WWII vet get that help to add to his income. Ben ended up getting some other benefits which he did not expect. Ben was not gay; but, he had a nephew whom he loved very much who was. I affectionately called him, "Uncle Ben" and I called his sister, Margaret, the mother of the gay man, my "Cyber Mom." We not only communicated on the internet; but, we talked on the phone a number of times, too.
Title: Re: If the army don't get me: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: csean97 on April 12, 2006, 12:55:29 PM
Ah, a subject near and dear to my heart.

Back in 2000, I spent 5 months working on a series for Salon called "Don't ask, don't tell, don't fall in love." Best thing I've ever written.

Links at the top of this page, if you're interested:

http://blogs.salon.com/0001137/stories/2003/06/16/linksToSomeOfMyBetterPublishedWork.html

(And I can give a brief update on the three captains, if people are interested.)

Just noticed this thread today, and just finished reading your Salon story.  Very affecting; it deserves wider disemination.  So many times I've seen TV coverage of vets returning home.   Most of the time the cameras focus on the straight couples in mid embrace; but then there are times when I've noticed a lone soldier, and have wondered if he was possibly military gay.  Which gets to your observations of the particular pain military gays suffer when separated from their partners and no support systems available to either of them.  I will mention a book I read years ago ... "Wingmen" by Ensan Case (Paperback: 408 pages, Publisher: Avon (1979), ISBN: 0380476479).  IMO, a wonderful, romantic, story of two US Navy fighter pilots, set against the background of WWII.  For anyone with gay/military interests, I highly recommend it; unfortunately, it is apparently a rare paperback, and bookfinder.com lists it at $65.  I've always thought Wingmen was film worthy; more so than "The Front Runner".  But impossibly expensive to produce.
Title: Re: If the army don't get me: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: SYC on April 15, 2006, 05:55:19 PM
First things first, BBM is NOT a gay film and NEITHER of the boys are gay! You may loose your virginity with one insertion, but you are not gay with one or more experiences with the same sex when you are ALSO a practicing heterosexual. The term is BISEXUAL.

Ennis would still be married to Alma had she not seen him with Jack! Think about it. Ennis is not the villain here, it is Alma, who has reservations and decided that a divorce was required. Her emotions simply could not be shared in a triangle.

Bill, tell us what you really think!! lol. 

Well, I couldn't disagree with you more.  BBM is a gay film.  Jack is gay.  Ennis is probably bisexual, but in my book that's still gay.  The fact that Ennis would be married to Alma if he wasn't caught has nothing to do with sexuality.  It's because Ennis is trapped in a culture that won't allow him to express himself, explore his sexuality, or spend time with the person he loves.  Ennis is not the villain.  Alma is not the villain.  And if I were Alma I wouldn't want to be in a triangle either. 

Your experiences in revisting your army buddies is valid.  But did you really expect 100 percent of the guys who fooled around with you to start living a gay life once they were out of the army?  Many of them just filled a need, like you said, and lean mostly toward heterosexuality.  Some were probably strongly gay, and out of those, some are in denial and others faced up to it and put the shingle out.  In a perfect world, full of equal choices and rights, the percentages of course would drastically change. 

In regards to the military issue.  I don't know anyone in the military.  So I don't know if this thread is appropriate for me.  However, I did want to say that I thought this war might have a small silver lining by helping bring respect to those who did not have any before the war.  Women were struggling in that respect.  People still thought they shouldn't fight, or if they do, they deserve to be raped.  My local paper did a nice story with glossy pics of these incredibly tough and great-looking girls in army gear and flight suits.  It send an important message, I think.  The Jessica Lynch thing was positive in that sense too.  Nobody said, the bitch deserved her legs broken.  The media made her (falsely it turned out) to be a hero, because their zeal was so high to praise anyone who was fighting the good fight. 

Well, guess what, gays and lesbians are fighting the good fight too.  Melissa E has a pretty good song about one of the guys on the plane who rushed the terrorists being gay.  Gays issues were starting to surface...like what benefits do the domestic partners of gays who died in the towers get.  There was that whole ask don't tell policy going into the war.  I really, really thought that gays would benefit from a national conversation to naturally develop from this.  Like Rosie the Riveter (sp) coming out of the kitchen after WWII, I imagined gay heros coming back from Iran and Afghanistan being applauded for their service, and people saying - hey, they're willing to die for a country that spits on them-- let's give them their damn civil rights.  But it hasn't happened.  I don't know if it's because of the fundamentalists or what.  But what a lost opportunity that is.


Title: Re: If the army don't get me: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: aintnoreins on April 26, 2006, 04:20:05 PM
as a current girlfriend of a (male) marine... i can definitely say that i know of a number of bisexual female marines, and i've heard a LOT of stories of homoerotic tensions among male marines who are otherwise "perfectly straight"...

it's such an interesting phenomenon to me. i grew up going an all-female catholic school where there was CRAZY lesbian tension (and sometimes, er, more than just tension... not that i was involved or anything  ;)  :D), and i wonder what the correlative is among military men and women. thanks for the insight so far, from everyone...
and UCMJ be damned.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: trauma@62 on May 30, 2006, 03:16:22 AM
Something that has bothered me  ----  I wanted to post on REUNION SCENE thread but was overwhelmed trying to surf 2,100 + messages to see if this has already come up.  Then, on site map, I was finally led to this thread.  This is a truly awesome website.

At my age, I am technologically challenged and don't know how to quote from prior posts  :-[

Anyway here goes with my first post to this board.

Ennis, Jack, and myself were all 19 back in 1963.  The REUNION occurred 4 years later.  1967 was a banner year for me, too.  Call it sex-envy if you will, but I came to be a bit miffed when it occurred to me that just at the very time Ennis and Jack were romping at the motel and on the mountain, I was being drafted into the U S Army, having lost my student deferment.  Since I couldn't imagine either Ennis or Jack having such a deferment, this has bothered me.  How can a story be told about two young men in this time and place without addressing the issue of compulsory military obligations???? 

I do appreciate Willhoite's attempts to account for this anomaly.  After 40 years, I have kind of forgotten exact details of Selective Service regulations in place way back then.  I do remember there was a "married with child/ren" classification that put a man further down on the list of eligibles. Don't know how Ennis managed to avoid draft for so long but I can kind of see that it could be possible, but Jack with a qualifying injury still seems to me a bit too far-fetched.

So, how do you think a stint in the military affect behaviour or attitudes or perceptions of either Ennis or Jack?  Someone has already thought about Jack.  You might want to take a look at this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_fQnCnfluHY&search=Brokeback%20Mountain%20Heath%20Ledger%20Jake%20Gyllenhaal%20james%20blunt%20Ennis%20del%20mar%20jack%20twist%20gay%20goodbye%20my%20lover%20video%20montage

It's a 4' 38" video entitled "Jack's in the Army -- Brokeback Mountain: The Continuation"  Quite frankly, I regard it to be more of an interruption than a continuation of the story.  I do not like it, but others seem to think it adds something.  So I post the link solely in the spirit of contributing something to this thread.

Thank you Willhoite and everyone else for reading this.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: jim ... on May 30, 2006, 05:45:21 AM
welcome trauma@62 to the forum.  We're glad you've joined us with this first post.  Your question about how serving in the military would have affected Jack and Ennis is interesting.  Although this thread I believe it geared more to the military of today and its policies, I don't know of any other thread on the board where your question would fit!  Being so, we'll leave it here and see what others have to say!  Thanks again for joining us.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Mr. Wrong on May 30, 2006, 01:58:06 PM
Ok I wasn't born then but I'll try to answer the military question about Ennis & Jack. In the motel scene Jack says the Army rejected him because he was too busted up. As for Ennis he was married with small children and I think men like that didn't get drafted? I'm not sure.

Jason
Title: Re: If the army don't get me: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: kaboyz on May 30, 2006, 05:46:20 PM
as a current girlfriend of a (male) marine... i can definitely say that i know of a number of bisexual female marines, and i've heard a LOT of stories of homoerotic tensions among male marines who are otherwise "perfectly straight"...

it's such an interesting phenomenon to me. i grew up going an all-female catholic school where there was CRAZY lesbian tension (and sometimes, er, more than just tension... not that i was involved or anything  ;)  :D), and i wonder what the correlative is among military men and women. thanks for the insight so far, from everyone...
and UCMJ be damned.

Interesting point...I was in a Southern military fraternity and let me tell you the homoerotic tensions were INSANE.  All I can say is that I would imagine it would be exactly the same for males in the military.  For me, it was a difficult time, falling hard for guys I was 'somewhat' sexually involved with but they were 'perfectly straight'.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on May 31, 2006, 09:20:44 AM
Ennis, Jack, and myself were all 19 back in 1963.  The REUNION occurred 4 years later.  1967 was a banner year for me, too.  Call it sex-envy if you will, but I came to be a bit miffed when it occurred to me that just at the very time Ennis and Jack were romping at the motel and on the mountain, I was being drafted into the U S Army, having lost my student deferment.  Since I couldn't imagine either Ennis or Jack having such a deferment, this has bothered me.  How can a story be told about two young men in this time and place without addressing the issue of compulsory military obligations???? 

I was drafted in 1970 and had been following the draft for quite a while before my number came up, literally (153)!

Before the lottery, there was a series of deferments, and Ennis, married in 1963 with two small children, would have been deferred by 1967, when the draft was heating up, without any great difficulty. That deferment would have been pretty routine. Alma was not working at the time, so he would have been the sole support of the family. He wasn't divorced until 1975, by which time the draft had been ended.

As for Jack, he probably had enough problems with his back, muscle strains and broken bones to get a medical deferment. He would have had to have proven his medical condition through a doctor's statement, but again that would not have been difficult to get. He could have encounted doctors during his rodeo tournaments, since there would have always been one standing by. The Army did not want to draft people with preexisting medical conditions, have these conditions exaggerated or worsened through physical conditioning, then be discharged and receive a government stipend because of the injury. Think of Joe Namath with his knees back in the 60's. He was in excellent physical shape for the most part, but he was deferred because the Army did not want to be obliged to discharge him in case he developed further problems with his knees during Army service. It was relatively easy to get a medical deferment until the late 60's, when the Selective Service started cracking down.

Hope this helps. I find Jack and Ennis as patriotic as any rural boys that you would find in that era.

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: trauma@62 on June 01, 2006, 01:45:01 AM
Ok I wasn't born then but I'll try to answer the military question about Ennis & Jack. In the motel scene Jack says the Army rejected him because he was too busted up. As for Ennis he was married with small children and I think men like that didn't get drafted? I'm not sure.

Jason

Thanks, Jason

Are you referring to what was said in the motel scene in the film?  Don't know how I missed that -- but I've seen the film only once and just about time of motel scene, I was completely overwhelmed by both dialogue and the visual, so I guess I could well have missed it.

Or are you referring to the motel scene in the story?  I have never read the story but I am aware there are differences.

To reiterate, my issue is mainly a literary one --- to fail to account for the impact of the draft on U S males in their 20s at that time, the story author and/or screenplay writers would display a lack of verisimilitude, IMO.

Thanks to you and posts by kaboyz and willhoite, I now surmise that my literary concerns are sufficiently satisfied.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: trauma@62 on June 01, 2006, 02:01:14 AM
Are you referring to what was said in the motel scene in the film?  Don't know how I missed that -- but I've seen the film only once and just about time of motel scene, I was completely overwhelmed by both dialogue and the visual, so I guess I could well have missed it.

Or are you referring to the motel scene in the story?  I have never read the story but I am aware there are differences.

To reiterate, my issue is mainly a literary one --- to fail to account for the impact of the draft on U S males in their 20s at that time, the story author and/or screenplay writers would display a lack of verisimilitude, IMO.

Thanks to you and posts by kaboyz and willhoite, I now surmise that my literary concerns are sufficiently satisfied.
Quote


Sorry, it was fritzkep], not kaboyz whose post addressed mine and gave me enough backround and example to allay the concerns I raised.

And, thank you, jim ... moderator for your kind words of welcome.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Dave Cullen on June 20, 2006, 12:05:20 PM
the latest pew research poll showed that americans now support gays in the military overwhelmingly, i think 2 to 1, and growing year after year. nearly every demographic group (except evangelical christians) now supports it, even a majority in the south.

and yet . . .

i guess the courage of our reps in congress will lag a decade or two.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: kaboyz on June 20, 2006, 08:35:01 PM
Pentagon memo: Homosexuality a disorder

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/13431328/

Some excerpts:

A Pentagon document classifies homosexuality as a mental disorder, decades after mental health experts abandoned that position. 

The Pentagon has a “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy that prohibits the military from inquiring about the sex lives of service members but requires discharges of those who openly acknowledge being gay. 

There were 726 military members discharged under the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy during the budget year that ended last Sept. 30. That marked the first year since 2001 that the total had increased. The number of discharges had declined each year since it peaked at 1,227 in 2001, and had fallen to 653 in 2004.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: graylockV on June 21, 2006, 04:44:05 PM
History shows that gay discharges drop when there's a war going on.  In some cases, you can tell, tell, and tell like hell, and they won't hear you, at least not until you return to stateside.  Part of the hypocrisy of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell."

Apparently, heterosexuals aren't such delicate flowers about sleeping and showering with gay people in an actual war zone, when there is a real possibility of explosions and being shot to death.

I do not speak from personal experience, just as someone who has tried to follow the issue over the years.  The late Randy Shilts did the watershed work on this in his book "Conduct Unbecoming." 

My father was a WWII veteran.  He said that in many cases they knew who the homosexual guys were and didn't care - as long as everyone did their job and respected one another - because "we figured those guys could take a bullet as well as anyone else."  Meaning that death or injury tend to be "equal opportunity" experiences, so why, when millions were being drafted, should anyone be exempt when they can do the job and otherwise mind their own business.   

Of course, in those days, if you got caught "en flagrante" you were in big trouble - prison, etc. 
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Carissa on June 28, 2006, 08:17:29 PM
Pentagon says homosexuality not a mental disorder (http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060628/pl_nm/arms_usa_gays_dc)
By Will Dunham Wed Jun 28, 3:30 PM ET

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Pentagon no longer deems homosexuality a mental disorder, officials said on Wednesday, although the reversal has no impact on U.S. policy prohibiting openly gay people from serving in the military.

After a 1996 Pentagon document placing homosexuality among a list of "certain mental disorders" came to light this month, the American Psychiatric Association and a handful of lawmakers asked the Defense Department to change its view.

The Pentagon said in a statement: "Homosexuality should not have been characterized as a mental disorder in an appendix of a procedural instruction. A clarification will be issued over the next few days."

"Notwithstanding its inclusion, we find no practical impact since that appendix simply listed factors that do not constitute a physical disability, and homosexuality of course does not," the Pentagon added.

m o r e . . . (http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060628/pl_nm/arms_usa_gays_dc)
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: BayCityJohn on July 20, 2006, 09:50:04 PM
Any other military brats out there?
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: speedskater on July 21, 2006, 03:17:59 PM
I wanna serve my country. I am going to give it a go.  :)
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Vicky0uk on July 21, 2006, 05:07:16 PM
It's ridiculous......in the UK we now have gays and lesbians in all the branches of the armed forces and have had our first same-sex military weddings.

At Europride for the first time, the Royal Navy marched in full uniform (though unfortunately the Army and RAF were not allowed to wear their official uniforms - a bit weird really).

Anyhow, as far as I know the Services have not collapsed into a trough of debauchery and mutiny as a result [though maybe chance would be a fine thing!]
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Carissa on July 27, 2006, 10:43:30 AM
Army dismisses gay Arabic linguist
By DUNCAN MANSFIELD, Associated Press Writer
Thu Jul 27, 7:17 AM ET
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060727/ap_on_re_us/gays_military;_ylt=AnlbjSiRkLD8EiqQR0GYx2VH2ocA;_ylu=X3oDMTA3MjBwMWtkBHNlYwM3MTg-
 
JOHNSON CITY, Tenn. - A decorated sergeant and Arabic language specialist was dismissed from the U.S. Army under the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy, though he says he never told his superiors he was gay and his accuser was never identified.

Bleu Copas, 30, told The Associated Press he is gay, but said he was "outed" by a stream of anonymous e-mails to his superiors in the 82nd Airborne Division at Fort Bragg, N.C.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: graylockV on July 27, 2006, 02:39:44 PM
Army dismisses gay Arabic linguist
By DUNCAN MANSFIELD, Associated Press Writer
Thu Jul 27, 7:17 AM ET
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060727/ap_on_re_us/gays_military;_ylt=AnlbjSiRkLD8EiqQR0GYx2VH2ocA;_ylu=X3oDMTA3MjBwMWtkBHNlYwM3MTg-
 
JOHNSON CITY, Tenn. - A decorated sergeant and Arabic language specialist was dismissed from the U.S. Army under the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy, though he says he never told his superiors he was gay and his accuser was never identified.

Bleu Copas, 30, told The Associated Press he is gay, but said he was "outed" by a stream of anonymous e-mails to his superiors in the 82nd Airborne Division at Fort Bragg, N.C.


So important information may go untranslated, and lives of other soldiers endangered as a result. 

All because of a stupid policy built on fear and bigotry.  Who says homophobia doesn't kill!
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lola on August 14, 2006, 08:35:56 AM
http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/08/14/military.gays.ap/index.html


'Don't ask, don't tell' takes highest toll at Missouri base

726 gay military members kicked out nationwide in 2005
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: estefue on August 14, 2006, 09:53:20 AM
As usual it's a question of ideology versus reality.  With the incresing need for troops, the decrease in recruitment (gee, I wonder why) and the growing unpopularity of this war of course we should be kicking hundreds of troops out because gay soldiers would be bad for morale >:(
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: jack on August 18, 2006, 07:09:52 PM
at the request of the management...

Pete just put up a poll at http://davecullen.com/forum/index.php?topic=12326.0 so we can find out approximately how many books we need to have printed in the first run. thank you...
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: chiaros on September 21, 2006, 07:43:36 PM
An interview by Jason Jones, from "The Today Show" ...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gXEqcQSTMfU
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lola on October 23, 2006, 12:03:33 PM
Actor and model Reichen Lehmkuhl, who won season four of The Amazing Race and dates Lance Bass, was sexually assaulted while in the U.S. Air Force, he says.

Lehmkuhl, 32, tells ABC News that when he entered the Air Force Academy, he had to hide his homosexuality under the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy. But his sexual orientation was the subject of speculation until one night, he says, when he was sent a message.

"A bag was put over my head," he says. "I was stripped of my clothes. I was forced to do things sexually with two other male cadets."

http://people.aol.com/people/article/0,26334,1549383,00.html
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: ImEnnisShesJack on November 25, 2006, 06:58:20 PM
Dave has an important announcement about the forum, which he asks all members to read:

http://davecullen.com/forum/index.php?topic=18085.msg602098#msg602098

We have set up a thread to discuss the situation. That discussion thread is linked from the post directly below the message from Dave. Follow the above link and you'll get to both.

Thanks
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: estefue on December 20, 2006, 06:03:37 PM
Please note following announcement

The administration has been working extremely hard to solve the slow down issue that has been plaguing the forum for some months now. It has been determined that to solve this we will have to change the host company of the forum. The new host server has now been contracted with by Dave as of today.

We are proceeding rapidly now and hope to have the conversion complete within a few weeks at the latest and hopefully much sooner. We will keep you (members) apprised. Please look for announcements in the Newsbox. Some changes will likely come up suddenly--that is the nature of computer conversions, so it is impossible to know before we test whether something will go flawlessly and take two hours, or uncover thorny issues that will take days. The testing process is being started. This will not affect the forum at this point.

So taking this into consideration, we don't want to give you timeframes that are unrealistic. As soon as we finish a stage, we'll proceed immediately to the next, and the exact changeover will likely come on very short notice to you (members). We will post this changeover time in the Newsbox as well as in the individual threads, and will give you as much lead time as we can manage. This will enable us to end the slowdown ASAP.

Thank you for your patience.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Dave Cullen on December 20, 2006, 11:27:04 PM
new story from AP:

New Poll Shows US Military Comfortable Serving With Gay Colleagues

http://www.connexion.org/newsstory.cfm?id=7574&returnurl=index.cfm

Quote
Los Angeles, CA - U.S. military personnel are increasingly comfortable serving with openly gay colleagues, a new poll has revealed.

The poll released Tuesday by Zogby International and the Michael D. Palm Center, reveals that 73 percent of military members are comfortable with lesbians and gays.

Nearly one in four (23 percent) service members report knowing for sure that someone in their unit is lesbian or gay, including 21 percent of those in combat units.

“Today’s poll is one more nail in the coffin of ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’,” said C. Dixon Osburn, executive director of Servicemembers Legal Defense Network (SLDN).


and that 73% is up from 13% in 1993, it says.

god. if 3/4 of the freaking soldiers are ok with it, and 79% of the public is (cited later in the story), then what the hell are we waiting for?

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on December 21, 2006, 07:30:33 AM
new story from AP:

New Poll Shows US Military Comfortable Serving With Gay Colleagues

http://www.connexion.org/newsstory.cfm?id=7574&returnurl=index.cfm

Quote
Los Angeles, CA - U.S. military personnel are increasingly comfortable serving with openly gay colleagues, a new poll has revealed.

The poll released Tuesday by Zogby International and the Michael D. Palm Center, reveals that 73 percent of military members are comfortable with lesbians and gays.

Nearly one in four (23 percent) service members report knowing for sure that someone in their unit is lesbian or gay, including 21 percent of those in combat units.

“Today’s poll is one more nail in the coffin of ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’,” said C. Dixon Osburn, executive director of Servicemembers Legal Defense Network (SLDN).


and that 73% is up from 13% in 1993, it says.

god. if 3/4 of the freaking soldiers are ok with it, and 79% of the public is (cited later in the story), then what the hell are we waiting for?



The current leadership of the military still does not want to offend the noisiest opposition. There was a report on the BBC this morning (don't have a link) about the father of several sons and daughters currently at the Air Force Academy investigating an active takeover of the Academy leadership by those interested in hastening the Apocalypse. Frightening.

Mod: still can't find the link it was on either Newshour or World Today, whatever is on between 1000 and 1100 GMT on 21 December, in the last quarter hour. The BBC website appears not to have updated yet.

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Castro on December 21, 2006, 11:03:39 AM
Quote

The current leadership of the military still does not want to offend the noisiest opposition. There was a report on the BBC this morning (don't have a link) about the father of several sons and daughters currently at the Air Force Academy investigating an active takeover of the Academy leadership by those interested in hastening the Apocalypse. Frightening.

Mod: still can't find the link it was on either Newshour or World Today, whatever is on between 1000 and 1100 GMT on 21 December, in the last quarter hour. The BBC website appears not to have updated yet.


Here's  one link with some of the background information.
http://www.theledger.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061216/NEWS/612160362/1326
There was a little flurry of stories last week about the "Christian Embassy" film.  As I recall, one of them said Weinstein comes from a military family, but I wouldn't swear to that.  You'll be able to google up more information.

It's very scarey.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: graylockV on February 28, 2007, 11:17:15 PM
Here's a link to a story about one of the first Americans - if not THE first - to be wounded in Iraq.  A marine who lost his leg.  Now he's coming out of the closet to testify in favor of repealing Don't Ask Don't Tell.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/02/28/gays.military/index.html

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: phrag3 on March 01, 2007, 06:53:02 AM
He was interviewed by Anderson Cooper last night.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Castro on March 01, 2007, 09:55:56 AM
fritzkep said
Quote
The current leadership of the military still does not want to offend the noisiest opposition. There was a report on the BBC this morning (don't have a link) about the father of several sons and daughters currently at the Air Force Academy investigating an active takeover of the Academy leadership by those interested in hastening the Apocalypse. Frightening.


There were a number of US stories about the fundamentalist influence in recent months.  Try Googling something like "Air Force Academy religion."  Something is sure to turn up.  Also, Google News may have the particular article you read - they link to English-language papers outside the US.

ETA: Here's a post by Alva in the Huffington blog:  http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eric-alva/dont-ask-dont-tell-fr_b_42310.html
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Boris on March 01, 2007, 12:58:32 PM
He was interviewed by Anderson Cooper last night.

His name is Eric Alva. His testimony in front of congress:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UYUxGwTlshY
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: graylockV on March 16, 2007, 02:04:42 AM
Isn't it amazing how these right-wing Republicans wake up to the truth AFTER they are out of office:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/13/AR2007031301507.html

A former Wyoming senator.  Do you suppose he paid a visit to Brokeback?
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: jpq716 on March 19, 2007, 02:53:28 PM
Please pardon my ignorance, but I have never been able to understand why a gay person would have the slightest desire to serve in the military.

It’s not merely because the military is a violently homophobic place, in which gay people run a real high risk of harm, even death, if they do not remain totally in the closet. It’s also because the military, like foreign espionage and domestic law enforcement, is increasingly an instrument of the small global plutocracy that is attempting to neo-feudalize the world in the interests of its own power, profit and, yes, even pleasure. What upstanding human being, not to mention upstanding gay human being, would want to lift a finger to support that? And does it matter in the end if a gay person gets tire-ironed for being gay or merely for being poor? The tire iron delivers the same blows in either case…

Now, of course, I am not saying that we don’t need armies, police forces and spy rings. Human nature being what it presently is, of course, we need them. It’s just that the armies, the police forces and spy rings that we presently have are being led by psychopathic criminals who hate the people whom they are theoretically sworn to protect and who are willing, repeatedly willing, to deal with the enemies whom they are supposed to fight at the expense of the people whom they are supposed to serve. It’s the old story, again and again: the cops and the robbers joining together to fleece the sheep. What upstanding human being would want to support that arrangement? What upstanding gay human being would want to support that arrangement? It totally beats me. Forget "don’t ask, don’t tell." How about "don’t join, don’t sell?"
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Dave Cullen on March 20, 2007, 02:44:11 PM
Please pardon my ignorance, but I have never been able to understand why a gay person would have the slightest desire to serve in the military.

It’s not merely because the military is a violently homophobic place, in which gay people run a real high risk of harm, even death, . . .

. . . It’s also because the military, like foreign espionage and domestic law enforcement, is increasingly an instrument of the small global plutocracy that is attempting to neo-feudalize the world in the interests of its own power, profit and, yes, even pleasure.

. . . It’s just that the armies, the police forces and spy rings that we presently have are being led by psychopathic criminals who hate the people whom they are theoretically sworn to protect . . .

wow. those are a whole lot of wild claims, with zero evidence. where do you come up with this stuff?

i served in the army and have several friends right there, and overall, i'd say this is a ridiculous overstatement: "a violently homophobic place."

the rest is just nonsense venom. i don't think that sort of baseless slander against the military in a thread about them is appropriate. if you have a case, make it. you have not.

i would probably have read right past it, but the opening statement i hear frequently, and it just really irritates me. aside from the policy, why would any gay person be more or less inclined to want to serve than a straight person? what the hell do they have to do with each other? your post sheds absolutely no light on that--all it sheds light on is why you would not want to. you are not everybody.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Dave Cullen on March 20, 2007, 02:51:30 PM
Isn't it amazing how these right-wing Republicans wake up to the truth AFTER they are out of office:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/13/AR2007031301507.html

A former Wyoming senator.  Do you suppose he paid a visit to Brokeback?

well, i'm just happy he's come around eventually.

i think we should be encouraging these people. simpson is highly respected within his party, and to publish that op-ed in the wash post under his own byline is huge. plus, he makes a really strong case.

the country's inabillity to recruit enough soldiers for the missions our Fearless Leader have gotten us into is becoming a huge issue, and may actually present an opening for us gayguys. and our linguistic and cultural ignorance in particular may be the biggest thing going for us. the country is most likely to change the policy when two things happen: 1) when enough of the public supports the change, and 2) the military actually needs us. #1 has happened, but congressmen are still way too wimpy to go out on a limb to demand our rights. they need an excuse, like an actual need. hopefully, they have one. it may still take a few years--but people like simpson are helping. and he provides lots of cover for other senators. if they can say they're just sharing his stance, that helps.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Dave Cullen on March 20, 2007, 02:56:15 PM
Meanwhile, Gen. Pace's comments were outlandish.

This was the HRC's email:

Quote
Yesterday, Gen. Peter Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told The Chicago Tribune that he supports the Pentagon’s “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” ban on gays serving in the military because homosexual acts “are immoral,” and compared it to an adulterous affair with the spouse of another service member.

 

It’s this kind of blind prejudice against the estimated thousands of gay and lesbian military personnel that defend our nation each and every day that is truly immoral.

In fact, Sen. John Warner, R-Va., ranking member on the Senate Armed Services Committee issued a statement today opposing Gen. Pace's comments. "I respectfully, but strongly disagree with the chairman's view that homosexuality is immoral," Warner said.

 


Earlier this month, I announced that I am a gay American as I stood with Rep. Marty Meehan (D-MA) to introduce the Military Readiness Enhancement Act, legislation to repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”  It was one of my proudest moments when I told Americans across the country that my sacrifice as the first US military wounded in Iraq was for all Americans, including members of the GLBT community.   
 

Please join me in sending a message to Gen. Pace and our nation’s leaders that this type of discrimination is wrong.

 

I urge you to contact the Department of Defense and the White House today to demand that General Pace apologize for his bigoted remarks.  You can use the talking points at the bottom of this email to help compose your messages. 

Yours,

Sgt. Eric Alva (ret.)

Talking Points:
The vast majority of Americans support the right of service members to serve openly and honestly, and the majority of service members are comfortable serving alongside gay and lesbian troops.
Judging gay men and women in the military for factors unrelated to their willingness and ability to serve our country undermines our military’s effectiveness.
"Don't Ask, Don't Tell" poses exorbitant costs to the military and nation.
This kind of prejudice is going to continue to have a direct impact on our national security as we fire qualified gay, lesbian and bisexual members of the military for no good reason.
General Pace’s bigotry must be condemned and he should immediately apologize to the nation and the estimated tens of thousands gay, lesbian and bisexual individuals currently serving in the military.
President Bush should also demand an apology from General Pace.

Please contact one of the below. I just sent Sen. Warner a msg. He really needs out support. Thanks.

d

To contact the Department of Defense, go here: http://www.defenselink.mil/faq/comment.html
To contact the White House, email: comments@whitehouse.gov
To thank Senator Warner for his comment, click here.  http://warner.senate.gov/contact/contactme.cfm
To take further action, please contact your Representative and encourage them to become a co-sponsor of the Military Readiness Enhancement Act, legislation to repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” 

Here's what I sent to Sen. Warner:

Quote
Sen. Warner,

Thank you so much for your quick and courageous stand against Gen. Pace's comments on homosexuality. You're a good man.

I'm a gay man who served as a private and a lieutenant in the Army in the 80s, and I was proud to do it.

Gen. Pace is entitled to think that homosexuality or anything else is immoral--but it is not appropriate for him to express that. He may well feel that other religions are immoral, but if he were to announce that Islam is immoral, there would be outrage. Similarly, if he were to say that inter-racial marriage between service members were. I'm sure that if we examined his life, we could find instances of immorality. I think it is disgraceful for him to condemn a whole class of people this way. And remarks like that just push us further back into the past where bigotry against gays is acceptable.

Thank you for being one of the first prominent officials to take a stand against these remarks. You have my gratitude.

Respectfully,

Dave Cullen
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: jpq716 on March 20, 2007, 07:00:40 PM
Dave, I am very sorry if my remarks on gays in the military annoyed you, especially since I have a great deal of respect for you for having created this wonderful forum and for having made it the vibrant cultural oasis that it has become on the Net. But my remarks on the iron triangle of class oppression in Amerika (the military / the intelligence services / domestic law enforcement) stand. And since I know just how sharp you are, I am sure that you can easily deduce how my remarks on this thread are but a small, even derivative, consequence of even more profound views that I have on the nature of contemporary society, above and beyond its physically coercive dimensions. And what can the two of us do at this point? Dance around the points of contention until we are exhausted? No, especially since, if my position be essentially true, we are shortly going to witness revelations that will substantiate it. For the proof of the pudding is ever in the tasting, and in nothing less.

By way of illustration, let us consider the case of Sergeant Eric Alva, which arrives --- by one of those exquisite ironies that appear too frequently in history to be accidental --- right in tandem with the case of ex-Marine Matt Sanchez. That the first military casualty of the Iraqi war should be a gay Marine is one of those facts of life that no novelist would dare to invent, and it is truly a devastating blow to the fundamental hypocrisy of the “don’t ask, don’t tell” charade. Pace’s unrepentant snarl about the fundamental “immorality” of gay sex and its equivalence to heterosexual adultery is his shell-shocked, knee-jerk reaction, not merely to the revelation that “a sinner” could be a hero (Alva), but also that a hero (at least to Ann Coulter and her ilk) could be “a sinner” (Sanchez). (In addition, it is a most unwise equivalence, since if the military ever seriously investigated the incidence of heterosexual adultery within its ranks, God alone knows how much of the military would remain in uniform. But you, Dave, having been a lieutenant in the Army during Silver Age of Reagan, might have better anecdotal information on the subject than I could… :D ).

Alva’s support of the Military Readiness Enhancement  Act is most touching and I respect him for it, but I have my doubts as to whether it will go anywhere legislatively at a time when the Demokrat majority in both Houses of Congress is unable to stop the Amerikan Caligula from “surging” to victory over the dead bodies of every last blessed man, woman and child in Iraq. Your letter to Senator Warner is also touching and I respect you for it, but I have been watching the Virginia fox for quite some time now (even before he temporarily hooked up with Liz Taylor, as a matter of fact) and I wish you good luck with him. I will never forgot the equally “courageous” remarks that he and Lindsay Graham made on the floor of the Senate about the Military Appropriations Act of 2006 last September and then how quickly they capitulated on the very next day and supported the gutting of habeas corpus after almost eight hundred years in Anglo-Amerikan law. This was an exquisitely shameful act, even for the Virginia fox, and I fear that it does not bode well for your appeal for his support.

But all of this is secondary, Dave. The last that I heard, Pace is still the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and he still has not apologized. What does that tell you, Dave? Even Alberto “El Torturador” Gonzalez is getting ready to ride the chute to oblivion, but Pace is still there. What does that tell you, Dave?

And once more, thank you for your visionary creation of this forum. It is a fine thing that you have created, especially since it manages to support viewpoints so deeply antithetical to your own. I don’t trust Warner --- and I fear for Alva --- but I admire you for what you have done, and through this forum, for what you are trying to do for a more genuinely equitable and freer society.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: graylockV on March 20, 2007, 07:10:34 PM
I am no fan of my senior senator, John Warner, but I give him credit for his comments.  He represents a huge number of military active duty and retired personnel, especially Navy (Newport News) and Marine Corps (Quantico.).  He gets no points for having the guts to go up against General Pace

I also appreciate that he refused to support Ollie North's candidacy when Ollie was the Republican Senate nominee back in 1994.  Remember, this is Pat Robertson/Jerry Falwell land and they wield a lot of power in the Virginia Republican party, which is somewhere on the spectrum to the right of Francisco Franco.

Makes me wonder if John Warner plans to run for re-election in 2008.  He might just take 30 years in office and call it a day.  Word is former-governor Mark Warner is planning to run for that seat. 
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: cwby on March 20, 2007, 07:41:20 PM
 ;D probably been mentioned already. Bill Maher's show on 07/03/16 talks about this issue. Bill brought to light that black men could not serve in the same unit/along side  the "whites" during the WW's.
Eventually your president of that era said enough is enough and amended the policy.
It was summarized that the military is slow to change then and now.
Now you have a repub presidential candidate from Arkansas-Huckabee (and a Baptist Minister to boot) unrepentent about his position on homosexuality/samesex marriage/gays&lesbians serving in the military. Huckabee's response: we would have to think about it- wtf is wrong in america that so few could have so large an influence?
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: jpq716 on March 20, 2007, 08:05:46 PM
Ah, cwby, but Huckabee is now candidate history. Not enough $$$, and truth apparently could not fill the gap...

And the last that I heard, Harry Truman is still dead. The more's the pity.... :(
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: graylockV on March 20, 2007, 08:21:15 PM
wtf is wrong in america that so few could have so large an influence?

Sorry to say, but it's not "so few."  To some extent, we have to wait for generational turnover to really get rid of a lot of silliness, and that takes a long time.  And we have to keep raising hell in the meantime.

Things change slowly but inexorably.  People never mention it, but fifty or more years ago there was a strong stigma against divorced people.  Unless you were the obvious victim - but even then, women were expected to put up with a lot.  "you made your bed...now you have to lie in it."  I am sure my parents - had they been twenty or thirty years younger - would have divorced.  But nice people didn't do that back in their day.  I know it is quaint.  But whether you approve of liberal divorce laws or not - they are here to stay.  And nobody cares that much.  As is also true about illegitimacy.  And interracial marriage, which was not permitted in some states until as late as 1966.  And artificial insemination and invitro fertilization.  I could go on and on.

I mention all this stuff because so many of these "family values" conservatives refuse to recognize that yesterday's immoral depraved person is today's upright citizen.  How many marriages do Giuliani, McCain, Gingrich have amongst themselves?  I believe it's eight, but who's counting?

If Falwell and Robertson and their ilk railed against divorce like they do against homosexuality their pews would be half empty.  But the reason they go after gay people is because it is still very popular to do so. 

Because - for some of these nitwits - if they can't hate queers, who can they hate?
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: jpq716 on March 20, 2007, 10:03:27 PM
You got that right, greylocke5. Not for nothing has homophobia been defined as "the last acceptable prejudice of the enlightened." And since it is no longer politically correct to send the little woman flying across the kitchen after a hard day at the office or to string up some black folks on a boring Saturday night, maybe gays bear the onus of an unprecedentedly intensive aggression (which, God help us, may be instinctual behavior above and beyond learned behavior). And perhaps gays can protect themselves from this generalized, but homocidal, aggression only by doing more of what women and minorities did: standing, turning, and fighting --- maybe to the death, if necessary...
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: bradINblue on March 20, 2007, 10:42:58 PM
Please pardon my ignorance, but I have never been able to understand why a gay person would have the slightest desire to serve in the military.

It’s not merely because the military is a violently homophobic place, in which gay people run a real high risk of harm, even death, if they do not remain totally in the closet. It’s also because the military, like foreign espionage and domestic law enforcement, is increasingly an instrument of the small global plutocracy

this is stupid. i've been in 'domestic law enforcement' for twenty years. my first few years as a married man. the last 18 years as a homo guy with a partner. for the first ten years, i never experienced/saw a shred of homophobia or racisim for that matter. in fact, my experience in law enforcement has been these are some of the most tolerant people around. i've never heard the word 'nigger' used once by my fellow cops in a disparaging reference to an african american. never heard fag or queer in reference to a gay person. yeah, seen some 'eye'rollin' for one 'over the top' but certainly not hate. cops learn early on, it's not about what you look like, what language you speak, who you sleep with. it's about good people and bad people. those bad people, who break the law and act like idiots get arrested. simple as that.

everyone know's i'm queer at work. i have many co-workers that are, and it's simply isn't an issue. yeah, military is a bit different, but things are changing fast. as for why any gay person would want to be in the military? perhaps it is because they want to defend their country, freedom, and our constitution. just like why so many gays join and so many more gays are cops.

as for the war we're in. that decision was an act of congress, and most so called liberal democrats voted to go. hillary clinton is one. everyone was blindsided by intelligence, most of which was provided by officials appointed by the clinton administration while bush was still tucked away in texis'.

it's time to seperate the stupid right or left politics from this debate/issue. so many more folks would be comfortable. lots i refer to are afraid of the radically left and not crow-bars, and stay in the closet. heck, these radical leftist's are about as intolerant as one can get.

brad

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Dave Cullen on March 20, 2007, 11:07:02 PM
Dave, I am very sorry if my remarks on gays in the military annoyed you . . .

You did much more than annoy me. You summarily dismissed and degraded three entire professions, and their membership: military, foreign espionage and domestic law enforcement. I don't know if we have any real-life spies on this forum, but I know we have a sizable number of current and former cops, soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines. And your wholescale dismissal of their careers was offensive to all of them. I have no idea what profession you are in, but consider how you would feel if someone wrote your calling off so cavalierly.

Your remarks were particularly inappropriate in a thread devoted to one of those professions, and especially to a thread devoted to the difficulty gay servicemembers are already encountering. Gay servicemembers are taking flack on one side for being gay, and the other--from people like you--for being servicemembers. Have you considered how much they are already dealing with, and how you are treating them as shabbily as Sen. Pace? Most career soldiers I have known have done it out of a true calling--they feel that is the profession they were born to do. Many identify themselves as a soldier as strongly as they identify themselves as a gay man or woman--often more so. To be degraded for that calling is just as offensive to them as degrading them for being gay.

I have not known a whole lot of cops, but I'm betting the same is true for them.

. . . What does that tell you, Dave? . . . What does that tell you, Dave?

The main thing it suggests to me is that you have a penchant for taking individual examples and extrapolating wildly.

Obviously there are homophobes in the military brass, some at or near the top. The same is true of the U.S. Senate, but I wouldn't use their existence to make a statement like, "I have never been able to understand why a gay person would have the slightest desire to serve in the Senate."

And I think you'll find far more members of the Senate leadership on the record saying far more homophobic things than Pace said. (Starting with our dear departed Sen Santorum, who was #3 in the leadership until January, who infamously compared us to man-on-dog action, and stood by the remarks.)

And I find it perplexing that you would bring up Sergeant Eric Alva to buttress your case. The man has just written a book and gone on tour proclaiming how much he loved his time in the military, and would be there today despite the policy if not for his injury. You seem to be missing the forest for the trees. Instead of asking how any gayguy could possibly want to be in the miliitary, why don't you listen to gayguys telling you why they want to be in the military? The very man you cite is trying to tell you--yet you cite his existence as "illustration" against his position that gays can find satisfaction in the military. Where does the listening come in?
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Dave Cullen on March 20, 2007, 11:11:28 PM
I am no fan of my senior senator, John Warner, but I give him credit for his comments. 

same here. i have seen plenty of things i have liked about him, and plenty i have not--some of each cited in this thread. but i have no interest in assessing his entire career, only in congratulating him on this specific move.

when people help us, and they take a lot of flack for helping us, they're going to feel a lot better about that flack if they also hear a lot of thanks. and it helps their colleagues find the balls to support us later, when they hear that the senator got a sizeable chunk of both hate mail and love mail after he made his remarks.

praising people who help us is important.

i'm not suggesting anyone vote for him, or write an op-ed praising his entire career. but i am suggesting we praise him for this move.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: jpq716 on March 21, 2007, 05:35:31 AM
Dave, I know that there are some good cops out there, and I presume that there are some good soldiers out there. Who knows? perhaps there even may be some good spies out there. But what you are demanding of me is that I grant that law enforcement, the military and both foreign and domestic espionage are basically decent and honorable professions. Maybe once they were and maybe someday they may be again, but in the Age of the Amerikan Caligula, they are not and cannot be. They are, in point of fact, instruments of oppression of the people and even subversion of the Constitution. And such being the case, I cannot understand why any upstanding gay person would want to have anything to do with any of them as long as the current state of affairs continues.

This is my last word on this matter in this thread, Dave. After all, I respect you highly for the work that you have done in this forum, and you are the last person within it with whom I would like to get into an argument. Peace, brother.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: ImEnnisShesJack on March 21, 2007, 05:46:06 AM
You got that right, greylocke5. Not for nothing has homophobia been defined as "the last acceptable prejudice of the enlightened." And since it is no longer politically correct to send the little woman flying across the kitchen after a hard day at the office or to string up some black folks on a boring Saturday night, maybe gays bear the onus of an unprecedentedly intensive aggression (which, God help us, may be instinctual behavior above and beyond learned behavior). And perhaps gays can protect themselves from this generalized, but homocidal, aggression only by doing more of what women and minorities did: standing, turning, and fighting --- maybe to the death, if necessary...


I don't know,  in Indianapolis, gay-oriented hate crimes and discrimination are illegal, but you can still poke fun at the fat kid.

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Dave Cullen on March 21, 2007, 08:34:25 AM
...But what you are demanding of me is that I grant that law enforcement, the military and both foreign and domestic espionage are basically decent and honorable professions.

. . . This is my last word on this matter in this thread, Dave.

I'm glad to hear that last part.

You are free to consider certain professions indecent and dishonorable, but the idea of choosing a thread about the plight of gays in the military as a place to make drive-by attacks on gays in the military as participating in an indecent and dishonorable profession . . . it just kind of staggers my mind.

And frankly, if you're going to attack any entire professions as indecent and dishonorable . . . God, well, don't do it as a drive-by. You better be ready to lay out a full case and explain your rationalle for trashing all the people involved. And I've really got to think about whether we want that here. I'm generally open to intellectual debate, so there's a way to pursue that, but you better approach it as intellectual debate. For example, if you truly feel a compulsion to announce to the forum that writing is an indecent and dishonorable profession and that all of us writers out there have a moral obligation to put down our pens and keyboards, well, I guess you have a right to make that case. But you better start out with a damn good rationalle for why you feel the need to do it, and then make a pretty strong case. And frankly, I don't think this forum would be a good place to host that bloodbath. I don't think it's a good place for the one you have chosen either.

Do not bring question their honor here again. If you feel the need to continue making statements about their honor, do it to me by PM.

I apologize to gay servicemembers trying to be part of this discussion. The purpose of this thread is not to attack you for who you are or the profession you have chosen. Please feel comfortable that more of this kind of behavior will not be tolerated here.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Nax on March 21, 2007, 09:28:34 AM
In all societies there is generally a desire for law and order the alternative is anarchy and instability.  Those who feel they want to be part of that enforcement are to be applauded, it takes a special type of person to be able to deal with these issues. Some of these people will be gay (statistically proven) and different societies will treat that fact differently. 

We cannot cloud the issue of what happens at the governing level of those forces, being gay does not define the rule of law that is being supported and metered out but may be at odds with that law by the fact the person may be gay and that is an issue for them alone.  We should strive for changes through the due process of democracy, one of those issues should be the fundamental rights of the equality of all people gay straight whatever.  Any human life dedicated to the service of others demands some respect from those of us partaking of those services regardless of gender, orientation, ethnic tags or anything else.

mini rant over. 

Equality for all should be the goal of all of us.

Neil.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: bradINblue on March 21, 2007, 09:33:36 AM
Dave, I know that there are some good cops out there, and I presume that there are some good soldiers out there. Who knows? perhaps there even may be some good spies out there. But what you are demanding of me is that I grant that law enforcement, the military and both foreign and domestic espionage are basically decent and honorable professions. Maybe once they were and maybe someday they may be again, but in the Age of the Amerikan Caligula, they are not and cannot be. They are, in point of fact, instruments of oppression of the people and even subversion of the Constitution. And such being the case, I cannot understand why any upstanding gay person would want to have anything to do with any of them as long as the current state of affairs continues.

This is my last word on this matter in this thread, Dave. After all, I respect you highly for the work that you have done in this forum, and you are the last person within it with whom I would like to get into an argument. Peace, brother.


talk about hate and intolerance. nothing peaceful here. This is my last word on this matter in this thread, good.

b
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on March 21, 2007, 04:33:09 PM
Brad, I honor your service to your city in your chosen profession of law enforcement, and I honor Dave, Jackie and all the rest of the members of the Forum who have served our country in the military. I am proud to have been a soldier, albeit a drafted one way back when. I dream of the day when gay men and women can serve proudly and openly in our military, as they can in many other countries.



Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: jpq716 on May 05, 2007, 12:04:04 PM
I really enjoy posting on this board (well, on certain areas of this board) and I realize that in daring to post this particular link in this particular thread I run the great risk of being banned from the board immediately. In fact, I have told myself to let the matter slide, since posting this link cannot help the situation and would certainly harm me here. But then I realized that I was just being a coward and getting down on my knees before the brandishing tire-iron in order to indulge myself in "safer" areas of discussion elsewhere on this fine board. And I realized that, if I just shut up and sat down in this matter, I couldn't enjoy posting here any more under any circumstances. So here's the bad news, oourtesy of yesterday's New York Times:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/05/washington/05military.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin

There, I've posted it. Go ahead and ban me from the board. It's the shameful truth that has been ignored for four years, and it comes directly from the Pentagon itself. It needs to be said. And as much as I enjoy posting on this board (well, on certain areas of this board), I am tired of being a coward, of allowing atrocities to take place right before my eyes while I look the other way. I don't want to be banned; I have much to give this board; but I would rather be banned this very instant than continue to live with this shame of complicity. Here I stand, God help me, I can do no other.

(One final point, after posting this post, I tested the link to see that it would work. It does, but first you have to go through  a New York Times advertisement to get to the article. The end must truly be near when we have to read advertisements in order to read an article --- which will probably cost us $0.95 to read after two weeks on the Net. But then, the article itself makes that point very clearly. In the latter Roman Empire the Roman legions degenerated into little more than bands of marauding thugs, and Barbara Tuchman, in her A Distant Mirror: The Calamitous Fourteenth Century, noted the degradation of warfare in the later Middle Ages. So here, now, for us --- and, ultimately, to us as well...)

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: 271horses on May 05, 2007, 06:04:52 PM
Old news.

What's your point?
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: bradINblue on May 05, 2007, 06:12:48 PM
I read and re-read the article and I couldn't find any reference to Gays or their friends in the military. I musta' missed something.

Brad
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: twtplanner on May 06, 2007, 06:33:23 AM
jpq716....

no need to think you have to apologize or have belief you'll be banned.  where'd that come from??

thing is, atrocities occur in most facets of life and are not limited to military or law enforcement.  The numbers mentioned in that article are small, small percentages when compared to the number of responsible and honorable members of our military.  You must know, surely, bad, hurtful and evil behavior occurs everywhere......gang life, corporate board rooms, gay ghettos.  It's the human condition.

terry
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Melisande on May 06, 2007, 07:44:01 AM
jpq716....

no need to think you have to apologize or have belief you'll be banned.  where'd that come from??

{snip}


I wondered that, myself. We have banned people, but not for posting links.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Boris on May 06, 2007, 10:29:21 AM
Without taking a stance on war in Iraq or the situation there, it could also be said that isn't it weird that American soldiers can fight together with Brits and Danes in Iraq, countries that not only allow openly gay people to serve but actively recruit gays? That the closest aliies Us has in current situation ALL allow gays to serve?



Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: 271horses on May 06, 2007, 12:38:35 PM
Yeah, but with all due respect, those are still a very small proportion of the fighting forces in Afghanistan and Iraq.  A joint effort of Armies of different nations is not the same thing as living in each other's countries and adopting their Constitution.  I am not supposed to post any personal stuff on this thread (a direct order) but lets just say I have had occasion to associate with soldiers from some of the countries you mention and it wasnt all that long ago that homophobia was alive and well in the ranks.
The British Army has been around since before there was even an idea of the United States, and it only recently suspended its ban on gay servicemembers.  The US is a much more diverse society than most of Europe (Britain is its closest equivalent in that regard), has been from its beginnings, and it is much harder to adopt an operating charter that accomodates all these grouos, many of whom disagree strongly with each other.  Its an ongoing process, as you can gather from past struggles over race, the widening role of women, and current ones over beliefs and in the last 15 years, sexuality.
The soldiers that are now serving alongside soldiers with openingly gay members in their ranks are mostly very young, and poll after poll has indicated that this younger generation is much less resistant to gay soldiers/sailors/airmen than the rank and file of my generation, who are now their CO's and NCO's.  In another decade or so, these youngsters will reach the command level, and the oldtimers of Gulf War 1 and Vietnam eras will be retired or dead and no longer in a position to influence military policy.
In any case, there is much less consensus on the ban among my former peers (late 30's to early 50's) than among the furiously resistant Vietnam generation.  A lot of it rose from the resistance to Bill Clinton and his attempts to rewrite policy; there was widespread disrespect for Clinton throughout the military, not just over the gay issue (the current troop level shortages are in large part due to the Clinton era drawdrown) and the subverting of Don't Ask/Don't Tell had as much to do with the contempt for Clinton as it did with homophobia.

Eventually, the ban will fade away.  I'm not expecting a landmark test case or nothing, just more on the order of the steady, quiet integration of female servicemembers into more and more MOS's, just as the Navy slowly integrated women onto all their vessels but submarines. 
This might not be the definitive change that activists would like to see, but this is one area of gay rights that I would about beg the gay community to stay out of and let us handle it our own way, among ourselves.  That ACT-UP demonstartion in Times Square over General Pace's remarks on upholding the ban likely set the cause back another couple of years. 
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on May 06, 2007, 01:24:17 PM
Although I didn't understand the truth about myself when I served (early 70's), I would certainly welcome soldiers being able to serve openly, and I hope it may happen. Unfortunately, as young soldiers get more ingrained into military life, the more they seem to adopt the mindset of their elders even if they were not homophobic to begin with. And, unfortunately, a test case through the courts probably would not help much because the courts tend to defer to the military more than any other institution in this country.

It is a special pity that the American military, which was in the forefront of racial integration (though not without a great deal of internal and external resistance), will be among the last of institutions to accept sexual orientation integration. Yet the arguments against both have been echoes of one another.

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: twtplanner on May 06, 2007, 01:41:29 PM
....Eventually, the ban will fade away.  I'm not expecting a landmark test case or nothing, just more on the order of the steady, quiet integration of female servicemembers into more and more MOS's, just as the Navy slowly integrated women onto all their vessels but submarines. 
This might not be the definitive change that activists would like to see, but this is one area of gay rights that I would about beg the gay community to stay out of and let us handle it our own way, among ourselves.  That ACT-UP demonstartion in Times Square over General Pace's remarks on upholding the ban likely set the cause back another couple of years. 

I agree.  sometimes the best course is to know who you're dealing with, and know how they deal with issues.

terry
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: 271horses on May 06, 2007, 02:22:01 PM
I would add, that unlike race and gender, gay servicemembers are not visibly identifiable, which makes this a different situation from either of those other two.
There is the sex factor and privacy factor, both of which are ridiculed by activists ("Now they know how women feel!") but that isnt helpful when you are trying to hammer out a workable policy and not raise the ire of the troops.  Whatever you feel on that, you got to deal with things as they are, not as you'd like them to be.
Back in '93, there was more sympathy for lifting the ban than the public might think, but then came the murder of Allan Schindler in a washroom, and the thinking was, if we lift the ban, there's gonna be a lot more cases like this, and that was not an overreaction, believe me.
It's a more complicated situation than racial integration was, and that sure didnt happen overnight, and in fact in some parts of the country it still aint happened.  I got a recent PM from a gal who attended a Navy service school in Meridian Mississippi and got stares like she had 12 heads when she ate her lunch in the mess hall every day with the only other female in her class, who happened to be black, and this was in 1993.
We dont need this to be further complicated by activists who often have a problem with the very idea of the military, calling for ther head of a General who, guess what, has a right to his personal opinion just as they do.  After the display in Times square, he''ll likely have more support for his opinion, not less, though they'll just be quieter about it.  Demonstrations of anyone other than vets that are anything other than orderly and respectful, are just gonna conjure up visions of recruiting offices filling with drag queens.
I'm sorry if that offends some folks, but that's how it is, I didnt invent this, I'm just reporting it.
I was grateful though that it was March and therefore too cold for sequined chaps over g-strings, and leather hot pants.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: bradINblue on May 06, 2007, 02:54:53 PM
We dont need this to be further complicated by activists who often have a problem with the very idea of the military, calling for ther head of a General who, guess what, has a right to his personal opinion just as they do.  After the display in Times square, he''ll likely have more support for his opinion, not less, though they'll just be quieter about it.  Demonstrations of anyone other than vets that are anything other than orderly and respectful, are just gonna conjure up visions of recruiting offices filling with drag queens.
I'm sorry if that offends some folks, but that's how it is, I didnt invent this, I'm just reporting it.
I was grateful though that it was March and therefore too cold for sequined chaps over g-strings, and leather hot pants.

I saw pieces of that march, and IMO I don't think that behavior changed anyones mind. Some of it was nauseating.

What might expedite what I'm sure is a policy change on our horizon, would be if every homo man and woman serving in our armed forces stepped forward and tendered a resignation. Some jaw-dropping at Joint Chiefs of Staff, for sure. I know this isn't going to happen, so we're stuck with the bureaucratic policy machine. Displays like what we saw in Times Square slows progress.

Brad
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: ybwc on May 16, 2007, 05:47:37 AM
how does one change the veneer of respectability? It's taken me a long time to get what some members are trying to say and at this point I have to agree.
Entrenched views that sit on the fence is what has me baffled though-Is there any truth to the "double standard" of the code of conduct?
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: CorvusCorax on May 29, 2007, 03:31:22 AM
Well, there's still half an hour left of Memorial Day, (if you live in Hawaii, anyway), so I think I'll observe our most somber holiday by reviving this thread.


how does one change the veneer of respectability?

Time and patience.  The promotion system for officers and senior NCOs is subjective and political, and when in doubt, they will err on the side of conservatism.  For anyone who is at the senior command level in the miltary, or in the DoD policy-making level, multiply by ten.  Many of these have their eye on political office, elected or appointed, and the fact remains that the cause of gay rights is not one that it pays to support in this field.  The miltary is a sacred cow among voting blocs, but when you anaylyze this, it becomes apparent that it is not as monolithic as it appears--for who is "the miltary?" The rank and file, the officers, civilian employees, and last but not least, big government contractors, are discrete groups with their own discrete concerns.
Closeted officers are in a unique and wrenching position of having to uphold the articles of miltary law as defined in the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), which includes the ban on openly gay service members, which in plain English means that if they discover one of their people is gay, they have the moral dilemma of shielding him or her, or being true to the oath they swore upon being commissioned.  That might seem like a no-brainer:
"If faced with the choice of betraying a friend or betraying my country, I hope I would have the guts to betray my country."
E. M. Forster

But someone who joins the military, especially on the officer career path, is likely to set a great deal of store by things like oaths and loyalty to one's country.
I truly believe the best policy for changing the Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy is to let the gay servicemembers do it themselves, individually changing the attitudes of their fellow servicemembers by being squared-away sailors, soldiers, and airmen, and for gay activist groups like ACT-UP, however well they mean, realize that the policy makers simply don't take them seriously (sorry, but there it is) and leave the fight to those most likely to win it.  If they truly want to help, writing letters to their Congressional representative and Senators really does make a difference, as does contributing to the Servicemembers' Legal Defense Network

http://www.sldn.org/templates/index.html

an organization that exists for the very purpose its name implies, to help out gay servicemembers in legal trouble, and fight the good fight against the wasteful DADT policy.
Servicemembers can help their cause by being smart about their associates (not easy, considering how many lead double lives as apparently heterosexual, married parents) and not asking for trouble by coming out to the entire planet on their MySpace pages, or appearing in gay porn on activeduty.com



Entrenched views that sit on the fence is what has me baffled though-Is there any truth to the "double standard" of the code of conduct?

Double standard as in the UCMJ enforced differently for gay v. straight, or male v. female members?  Depends on the command and the situation.  The UCMJ also has laws against adultery which are sometimes deployed and almost always against heterosexuals (we had a case on my ship where one sailor carried on an affair with the wife of another while he was on a WESTPAC cruise), but generally, only if it becomes an issue on the job.  The sodomy law can, and has been used against heterosexuals, albeit in nothing like its use against homosexuals.  Most frequently invoked "none of your business" article that is invoked is the one against fraternization, which forbids overly familiar association between officers and enlisted, or enlisted people too far apart in rank, or between any two people in which one is in the other's chain of command.  It is actually a necessary rule, for obvious disciplinary reasons, and because of the potential for favoritism, as fraternization really does undermine unit cohesiveness, as I saw constantly.
In the case of male and female servicemembers, males in less traditionally male fields such as administration or medical were more closely scrutinized, as were women who had traditionally male jobs.  This holds more for enlisted people than officers, but generally speaking, women are far more likely to be investigated than men, or were back in my day, for their simply being in the military, a "men's" job, was suspect to begin with, and the further you deviated from the traditional view of women, the more likely you were to be suspected--in a male-dominated field such as the repair or engineering division, single, didn't take advantage of the lopsided gender ratio (10:1 when I was in the Navy) to speedily catch a husband/s, unfeminine appearance, all these could lead to questions, and eventually, to being investigated.
271horses and I compared notes between the Army and Navy for the time that DADT was implemented, and one thing struck us both, how inconsistently the ban is enforced.  Some commanding officers (CO) could care less, and others, obsessed with the subect.  A change of command could change the climate instantly.  Some commands got a reputation for for being "where the gays are", and their CO's tended to be replaced by rabidly homophobic successors; the witch hunts would soon follow.  We both thought this was the way the brass dealt with the situation from on high, without a paper trail or an official word uttered, but even if that was not precisely the case, it was still very effective at keeping gay service members isolated and wary, policing themselves.
This subject gets extensively treatment in the autobiography of Reichen Lehmkuhl, known to most of America as the gay guy that won The Amazing Race, who before his reality TV glory was a cadet at the USAF Academy, and an Air Force pilot for 6 years.  Lehmkuhl perhaps does not come off too well--shallow and arrogant, really, and I don't see a Pulitzer in his future, but that aside, his descriptions of the more mundane aspects of Academy life and training, and how the gay cadets coped, or didn't cope, are really illuminating.

http://www.amazon.com/Heres-What-Well-Say-Growing/dp/0786717823/ref=sr_1_1/102-3207293-5238516?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1180430897&sr=1-1
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Dave Cullen on June 19, 2007, 05:49:42 PM
OK, time to get this thread back on topic (that May 5 post was annoying in my view, as it had nothing to do with gays in the military, or the policy on them.)

there seems to be quite a bit of talk about the policy again, perhaps because the pres election is forcing politicians to address it.

there are a couple interesting new stories this week:

Conservative Bob Barr Calls on GOP to Oppose ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’
http://www.connexion.org/newsstory.cfm?id=10145&returnurl=index.cfm

Congresswoman Ellen Tauscher to Become Lead Sponsor of Legislation to Repeal ‘Don't Ask, Don't Tell'http://www.connexion.org/newsstory.cfm?id=10157&returnurl=index.cfm

it's definitely encouraging to see hardcore conservatives like Barr coming out on our side. that may give some cover to the chickens. (which probably includes several of the R pres candidates. he calls them out on it, too:

Quote
. . . He suggested that Republican presidential candidates who opposed the repeal of the policy during last week's debate "showed a disturbing move away from conservative principles, in favor of what smells strongly of political expediency or timidity."
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: merrobot on July 21, 2007, 02:23:54 PM
I'm about 3/4 of the way through this book:

Major Conflict by retired USA Major Jeffrey McGowan

http://tinyurl.com/28qsbf (http://tinyurl.com/28qsbf)

It is a very moving account of his experiences in the army and the internal conflict that he experienced trying to reconcile his identity as an officer with his sexual orientation.  I was particularly struck by his insight here,

"I reminded myself that we all have to make sacrifices, that we all have our unique cross to bear, and that I, as one man, was certainly not going to chance an unjust military policy, let alone the world.  What I didn't realize at the time is that change often occurs when individuals do take a stand.  Through a simple, straightforward act, a complete nobody can make the world sit up and take notice.  And even if that one person doesn't succeed, whatever he does accomplish will almost certainly make the effort easier for the next person who tries."  (p.204).

Well worth a look if you are interested in this subject.  I personally hope there are more guys like him in the military - a true officer and a gentleman!  :)
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: TwistEnnis on August 01, 2007, 03:26:09 PM
This has probaby already been seen or posted, but thought I'd throw it in here.

WASHINGTON, DC -- Admiral Michael Mullen, President Bush's nominee to succeed General Peter Pace as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, was questioned about the military's "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" ban on lesbian, gay and bisexual personnel during a Senate hearing Tuesday.  Republican Senator Susan Collins of Maine queried Mullen on the continued dismissal of gay troops under the ban.  While confirming that he would implement the current law, Mullen also told Collins that "I really think it is for the American people to come forward, really through this body, to both debate that policy and make changes, if that's appropriate." He went on to say that, "I'd love to have Congress make its own decisions" with respect to considering repeal.  Mullen's remarks follow a firestorm of controversy surrounding comments by Pace referring to gay personnel as "immoral" during a March interview with the Chicago Tribune.

Immediately prior to his nomination as Chairman, Mullen told The Brookings Institution in Washington that "If it's time to revisit that policy, the American people I believe -- and we live in a country -- the American people ought to raise that issue and we'll have the debate. As a member of the Joint Chiefs and obviously the head of one of the services, I will contribute to that and give my best military advice based on what -- the debate that's going on, and if it changes, it changes. I think that's the path right now."

"Admiral Mullen's remarks are a welcome change of pace among military leadership, where there has long been an adversity to encouraging debate on opening the services to lesbian and gay patriots," said Sharra E. Greer, director of law and policy for Servicemembers Legal Defense Network (SLDN). "As Senator Collins rightly pointed out, there is growing concern among the national security establishment that the loss of talented gay troops is having a detrimental impact on our armed forces.  Admiral Mullen should be applauded for his willingness to take part in a national conversation about that issue, and for his open-minded approach to working with Congress as they consider the future of 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell.'"

During her questioning, Collins noted that she had "recently met with a retired admiral in Maine who urged me to urge you to reexamine the 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' policy," indicating that military commanders are beginning to support Congressional action to revisit the law.  The Military Readiness Enhancement Act ( H.R. 1246), a bill to lift the ban on open service, is now supported by 126 bi-partisan lawmakers in the House of Representatives.  A recent poll of military personnel found that 73% of those surveyed were comfortable around gays, and CNN found last month that 79% of the American public support repeal.

"More and more military leaders are willing to take a second look at this counter-productive law, and we are hopeful that Admiral Mullen is among them," said Greer.

For more information on "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," and Congressional legislation to repeal the law, visit http://www.sldn.org/.

Servicemembers Legal Defense Network is a national, non-profit legal services, watchdog and policy organization dedicated to ending discrimination against and harassment of military personnel affected by 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' and related forms of intolerance.  For more information, visit http://www.sldn.org/.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on August 01, 2007, 04:32:02 PM
Hope, hope, hope, Mitch!

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Dave Cullen on March 27, 2008, 09:47:45 PM
I have something specific to say, which I'll post in the next msg, but this topic has been dormant for awhile and I think it's important, particularly during the campaign.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Dave Cullen on March 27, 2008, 09:53:17 PM
the Washington Blade has an interesting story about a thorny topic: a gay soldier was killed in Iraq, and three mainstream media did a story about him--NPR, Washington Post, and the local paper--and none mentioned that he was gay.

the W Post actually met to consider it:

Quote
Lynn Medford, Metro editor for the Post, said the newspaper debated whether or not to disclose Rogers’ sexual orientation and ultimately decided not to include such information as a matter of ethics. Rogers to some degree “kept his orientation private” and outing him after his death would “take a decision out of his hands,” she said. Rogers had no partner and no immediate family to consult with to determine what his wishes would be, Medford noted.

“We had no way of knowing what his wishes were, and that’s what we came down and decided on,” she said.

Deborah Howell, ombudsman for the Washington Post, reiterated that  Post editors decided there was no proof Rogers was gay and no evidence Rogers would want to be publicly known as gay after death. The Post has a policy of not mentioning a person’s sexual orientation unless it is germane to the story, she said.

“They just felt it was a matter of privacy and they neither knew his wishes nor felt comfortable with [discussing his sexual orientation],” she said.


http://www.washblade.com/thelatest/thelatest.cfm?blog_id=17404

i got an email from someone who knew him, and a lot of the gay friends feel it's an important part of the story. i've had straight editors, who are very nervous about what they see as "outing" anyone. they still tend to view us through the lens of shame. i think they tend to go overboard in trying to "protect" us.

what do you all think?

(btw, oddly enough, i knew the w post reporter quite well in college. i worked with her at the college paper and hung out with her. it's been 20 years, but she was as liberal and compassionate as they come then. i can't imagine her coming from any sort of bigotted place. i just think straight people are too "careful" with us.)
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Dal on March 28, 2008, 10:10:19 AM
I think they were being respectful.  Of course, they would be damned if they did and damned if they didn't; but the Post is used to that situation.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Ellen (tellyouwhat) on March 28, 2008, 12:10:11 PM
I agree with Dal, damned if they did and vice versa.

Sometimes I wonder about the description of people in newspapers -- a crime victim is described as a "petite blonde" -- hmm, what if I was a crime victim, would they say "fairly tall, fading brown hair?"

Or, if a suspect commits a crime, should they say his/her race, or not?  Sometimes they do, sometimes they don't.  I don't really know the answer.

***********

I haven't read all this thread, so I don't know if this was posted before, but I came across this song on youtube -- GI Josephine -- written and performed by Boy George in the early nineties while he was touring here and Clinton came up with Don't Ask, Don't tell.

"Soak me down with your desire
in the shower-- under fire,
Wave the white flag, keep it clean!
Call me GI Josephine!"

"No friggin in the riggin, you can leave the boys to me"

"...open up the pearly gates, ain't no time to wonder why-- anyone can die!"

interesting lyrics and a catchy tune, although the video part is extraneous, in this case.  :)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W5ilcf7PB3g
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: tonydude on March 28, 2008, 07:08:27 PM
   Oh, well....here goes a whole bunch of nothing, but will post it anyway.  With regard to the "Don't ask, don't tell" policy, there is a related issue and that is the enforcement of this and earlier, more severe polices by the military intelligence communities.  They have, at times, been brutal, and unlawful, particulary during the time period between 1970-1990, when they basically were little more than gay-bashers, with advanced training manuals.  This would be that glamorously portrayed ( on T.V.) NCIS, and probably, other similar agencies.
   How do I know?  Well, again---here goes:  the Ariel Weinmann spy case here in  Norfolk.  It is now considered one of the most secret cases in U. S. history, and yet what did he steal?
"Confidential biographies".  Yeah, right.  The Navy shuts down, over....biographies.  Of whom?  Elizabeth Taylor?  Read "confidential biographies" as files on U. S. citizens, i.e., domestic spying, and you have the answer to the madness that never did unravel
  It wasn't a spy case, but a cover-up.  According to the published reports, Weinmann, a sailor, downloaded the files hoping to take out George Bush and his Iraq war.   But the dumb cluck didn't go to the N. Y. Times---he fled to Europe and sold to Russia.  Allegedly, he was caught attempting to return to the U.S., but that was a lot of crap.  NCIS lured him back by pressuring his father and offered a deal.  If he would accept a light sentence and shut up, all would go well for him.
  How do I know?  Well, I met the creep on my exercise walk near the Norfolk Naval Base.  3 days before the alleged date of arrest.  It was a wild and wooly 1/2 hour encounter and I didn't know who he was, only that I immediately started getting hit by the feds and the Navy security people, every day, on my walks.  4 months later, the local paper broke the story and I recognized him and knew I was in deep trouble.  I have an advanced degree in Russian, and had been near to a previous spy case (Glen Souther). My troubles being harrassed were at their worst for the duration of the court martial, maybe because I could testify that NCIS had lied to the court about his date of arrest.  The newspapers blandly reported the idiotic aspects, such as that he had been kept at a motel near my home, and let out at least once for an exercise walk, as they admittedly negotiated with him.
  I can only guess why he was turned loose on me and that guess is that they told him they would test his keeping a deal by having him meet a security risk (that would be me).  And his conversation that day gave me enough information to figure out what caused the encounter and what hold NCIS had over him.
  Back to gay bashing. Nothing made sense about any of my experiences until my brother told me to look at the past, and there I did see, connecting really close dots, that NCIS had had me on their crap list for a long, long time and had, on occasion broken the law.
  Its just too long to go into, and I am tired of the pressure they put on me, but those confidential biographies were files on U. S. citizens, and a strong number would have been of the extremes that NCIS went to, to enforce no gays in the military.  Not all, but a significant number.  And since they broke the law repeatedly (targetting civilians as well as sailors), they could not afford a scandal of that magnitude to embarrass them, the military, the agency itself, and, of course, the President, who sure didn't need a domestic spying scandal.
  I don't know why this case never cracked wide open- it remains stupefying even leaving out what I have said here.  But if it did get exposed, down would go NCIS, and probably the publics belief that the military has handled the issue with sober policies and sanity.  They didn't.  They bashed gays.  Civilians and military. Here in Norfolk.  And the chances of that ever coming out are...zilch.
   Even so, those who want a change in treatment of gays fighting for our country, should go for the weak link----and that weak link is the abusive handling of the enforcement of policies, with or without the evidence Ariel Weinmann stole.  Hit there, and you will get the homophobes where they are at risk, and that is--where they have broken the law.
  Damn.  I even used to like watching the t.v. show "NCIS".  Now, it makes me sick to see an agency built on bashing gays---glamorized.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: tonydude on March 28, 2008, 08:15:15 PM
    Darn.  Let me simplify the above post by just leaving my own experiences out of it.  The prior policy, of no gays in the military, was enforced by a police/intelligence agency whose mission it was to hunt down gays.  Think of the mentality involved, as they gathered in their offices and briefing rooms. They had to be sick to even hold a job like that.  Well, the policy has changed, but it's still....the same people.  They didn't fire them. And you're still paying their salaries with your taxes.
  Please consider going for the weak link, and that has got to be NCIS and related bureaucracies.  Ask your congrssional reps for a thorough review, going all the way back, of whether they abided by the rule of law as they enforced whatever policy was there.  Do you really think they did?  And if the review were thorough, the American people would probably be nauseated at the snooping, the use of snitches, the voyeuristic tendencies, the use of lures, all to hunt down....gay people.  Target the policy and you have a long, long battle.  Target the weak link in all this, the enforcers, and you have the country in general agreement---something is very sick there, and needs reform.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: MsMercury on March 28, 2008, 08:23:04 PM
I just wanted to add my 2 cents here. I haven't gone back and read all the posts but my friend who is in the navy, told me that it's no longer "don't ask, don't tell". They can no longer kick you out of the military for being gay. That is not to say they can't find another reason if they wanted to or make your life total hell. Is that how it is now?
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on March 28, 2008, 08:40:26 PM
As far as I am aware, the military can still quite easily discharge an individual for being gay. But because of the wartime situation in which we find ourselves at present, the lower-level officers, company level and such, are more willing to look the other way if the individual is needed for the good of the unit. If the war were to suddenly come to an end, the gay individuals would then be discharged and cast aside because they would no longer be needed as much. It is rather ironic, because the most vociferous opponents of gays in the military frequently cite the closeness with which same-sex individuals must work together in a combat situation and state that gay individuals would compromise the cohesion of the unit. On the contrary, however, even in World War II, gays were more likely to be retained in the military, only to be dishonorably discharged once the war was over.

 
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: MsMercury on March 28, 2008, 08:44:24 PM
Thanks for your reply.  I got the impression that this was something that just happened in recent months. I'll ask my friend about it again.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on March 28, 2008, 08:46:35 PM
I was in the Army myself way back when (drafted in 1970), but didn't realize that I was gay back then. Not that I didn't have a pretty good idea, but denial was strong.

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Dave Cullen on March 29, 2008, 10:55:54 AM
my friend who is in the navy, told me that it's no longer "don't ask, don't tell". They can no longer kick you out of the military for being gay. . . .  Is that how it is now?

yup, fritz is right. nothing has changed, officially.

i think the war situation has changed, as well as attitudes in the field. a recent poll (by pew or gallup, i believe), showed a large majority of active duty military people feel the policy should end.

i have quite a few friends still in the military, and they say has gotten much more lenient in some areas. but you still have to be careful. you never know when the wrong person will decide to act against you.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Dave Cullen on March 29, 2008, 10:57:23 AM
Andrew Sullivan has picked up the story, which will get it a lot of attention:

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/03/the-washington.html#more

of course "a lot" is relative, but a lot of writers and editors will see it, and hopefully start to see this from another perspective.

I think he did a really good job with teasing out the problem here:

Quote
The only reason Rogers was even semi-closeted to his peers was to protect his career in the military. As treasurer of an organization to end the military ban and with countless sources testifying to his sexual orientation, the decision of the Post and NPR to enforce the closet even after his death cannot be expained except by a view that somehow being gay is shameful or private. I can see why outing someone who is alive and closeted is unethical; inning someone who is dead and was out is a function of utterly misplaced sensitivity, rooted in well-intentioned but incontrovertible homophobia.

We already persecute these gay heroes when risking their lives for their country. For the MSM to maintain the shame, stigma and persecution after their death is unnacceptable. Email Howell at ombudsman@washpost.com to ask for the Post's defense.

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Dave Cullen on March 29, 2008, 11:00:44 AM
I think they were being respectful.  Of course, they would be damned if they did and damned if they didn't

i think their heart was in the right place by trying to be respectful--doing what they thought would be respectful, in their eyes. but i have faced this situation with straight editors before, and i think a lot of them have trouble seeing what it is that a gay person would feel as respect. i think they have inadvertantly shown great disrespect. (i think andrew did a good job explaining why, in a nutshell.)

yes, they were damned to complaints either way, but that's another way of saying they had a tough call, and had to make the ethical choice, knowing they would take flack either way. i think they made the wrong ethical choice.

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: milomorris on March 29, 2008, 12:16:10 PM
The Post has a policy of not mentioning a person’s sexual orientation unless it is germane to the story, she said.

As far as I'm concerned, that's all Ms. Howell needed to say. That statement clearly explains why the paper decided to do things the way it did. It is ALWYAS best to err on the side of discretion when someone's reputation is on the line. Especially the reputation of a dead man who can no longer explain himself to people. Would they have made a different choice if Rogers had left a life-partner behind? I'm sure they would have.

As far as Mr. Sullivan's position on this issue goes, I think he has to remember that just because he has "countless sources testifying to his sexual orientation," does not mean that Rogers was 100% out. Apparently he was not out at work. Perhaps he was not out in public either. Maybe he was only out to specific friends, or only within the framework of the segment of the gay community with which he kept company. Sullivan should consider that he himself is on the "inside," and that people on the "outside" might have no clue what Rgers was about in this regard.

And now that Rogers is dead, just who is served by outing him anyway??

Milo

Edited to fix quote
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: BayCityJohn on March 29, 2008, 01:19:28 PM
I think the editors made the wrong decision.

As a former treasurer of AMVER, Rogers was obviously very concerned about the 'don't ask' policy.

If you can't find out about a person's life from that person's partner or family, the next step would be to ask their friends.

It was germane to his life and career, so I don't understand why it wouldn't be germane to the story.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on March 29, 2008, 01:50:51 PM
The Post has a policy of not mentioning a person’s sexual orientation unless it is germane to the story, she said.

As far as I'm concerned, that's all Ms. Howell needed to say. That statement clearly explains why the paper decided to do things the way it did. It is ALWAYS best to err on the side of discretion when someone's reputation is on the line.

Yeah, the policy is--if a person is straight, we mention it--no one has a
problem with that.  If they are gay, we have meetings and decide wether
it is germaine to the story.  Mark Bingham,  who was on the ill-fated flight
93 on 9/11 was gay, we know that, but how is that germaine to that
particular story?  (I know why it is to "me".)

Quote
It is ALWAYS best to err on the side of discretion when someone's reputation is on the line.

I hear Eliot Spitzer laughing.

In this case I think it's appropriate in the larger sense because the
American people should know there's gay people in the military, despite
the insipid policy.  That's why we are discussing it anyway.  If the press
had mentioned it in the first place, it would've garnered a couple
paragraphs here and there and largely gone unnoticed.  Now it's a
debate. 

Quote
As far as Mr. Sullivan's position on this issue goes, I think he has to remember that just because he has "countless sources testifying to his sexual orientation," does not mean that Rogers was 100% out.

Yeah, "I'm not gay, but my boyfriend is."

Quote
Apparently he was not out at work.

"Don't ask, don't tell, anyone?

Quote
Perhaps he was not out in public either. Maybe he was only out to specific friends, or only within the framework of the segment of the gay community with which he kept company. Sullivan should consider that he himself is on the "inside," and that people on the "outside" might have no clue what Rogers was about in this regard.

...just who is served by outing him [now] anyway??

I'm not trying to be flippant, because I know outing people can cause the
outed person a lot of discomfort.  Over the years, though, I don't think
I've EVER read anyone who has come out or been outed thought that it
wasn't worth it in the long run for their own sanity and peace of mind.
Disregarding the affected person, the gay & straight public at large is
served by outing gay people.  Even the rightest of conservatives, Barry
Goldwater, came around to gay issues when the knowledge of his
own grandson being gay came out in the open.  After that he was open
to all sorts of gay issues.  (I want to say that I think it was his grandson, I
am not entirely sure of the person.)

If you are straight, you just live your life and this issue is irrelevant.  That
is why it's an important issue to gay people.  In a perfect world, this
item would not have had to be discussed at a newspaper editorial
board.  It would just have been out there.

And, either way, now it is.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on March 29, 2008, 02:04:31 PM
As an aside:

During the 90's, when I worked at a chain of video stores, one of the
things we were encouraged to do by ads or announcements in some
trade magazines, was to send our old screening copies or extra videos
to servicemen overseas and periodically addresses would be provided,
with the heading being To:  Any Servicemen -- and then the address.

Because the stores I worked at catered to gay clientele, we had lots of
gay themed films.  (Not porn, that was not allowed, obviously.)  On many
an occasion, I made some separate small boxes with these films inside
and addressed it to:  Any gay Servicemen -- etc.

Although I'd like to continue with a story that had an ending, I don't.  I
often wondered what happened to them as they were received.  I'd like to
think someone said "Oh, this box is for so and so" without much fanfare,
but who knows?

After reading tonydude's posts, perhaps they were used to ferret out
and dismiss gay soldiers, which I hope did not ever occur.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on March 29, 2008, 02:10:07 PM
   Oh, well....here goes a whole bunch of nothing, but will post it anyway.  With regard to the "Don't ask, don't tell" policy, there is a related issue and that is the enforcement of this and earlier, more severe polices by the military intelligence communities.  They have, at times, been brutal, and unlawful, particulary during the time period between 1970-1990, when they basically were little more than gay-bashers, with advanced training manuals.  This would be that glamorously portrayed ( on T.V.) NCIS, and probably, other similar agencies.
   How do I know?  Well, again---here goes:  the Ariel Weinmann spy case here in  Norfolk.  It is now considered one of the most secret cases in U. S. history, and yet what did he steal?
"Confidential biographies".  Yeah, right.  The Navy shuts down, over....biographies.  Of whom?  Elizabeth Taylor?  Read "confidential biographies" as files on U. S. citizens, i.e., domestic spying, and you have the answer to the madness that never did unravel
  It wasn't a spy case, but a cover-up.  According to the published reports, Weinmann, a sailor, downloaded the files hoping to take out George Bush and his Iraq war.   But the dumb cluck didn't go to the N. Y. Times---he fled to Europe and sold to Russia.  Allegedly, he was caught attempting to return to the U.S., but that was a lot of crap.  NCIS lured him back by pressuring his father and offered a deal.  If he would accept a light sentence and shut up, all would go well for him.
  How do I know?  Well, I met the creep on my exercise walk near the Norfolk Naval Base.  3 days before the alleged date of arrest.  It was a wild and wooly 1/2 hour encounter and I didn't know who he was, only that I immediately started getting hit by the feds and the Navy security people, every day, on my walks.  4 months later, the local paper broke the story and I recognized him and knew I was in deep trouble.  I have an advanced degree in Russian, and had been near to a previous spy case (Glen Souther). My troubles being harrassed were at their worst for the duration of the court martial, maybe because I could testify that NCIS had lied to the court about his date of arrest.  The newspapers blandly reported the idiotic aspects, such as that he had been kept at a motel near my home, and let out at least once for an exercise walk, as they admittedly negotiated with him.
  I can only guess why he was turned loose on me and that guess is that they told him they would test his keeping a deal by having him meet a security risk (that would be me).  And his conversation that day gave me enough information to figure out what caused the encounter and what hold NCIS had over him.
  Back to gay bashing. Nothing made sense about any of my experiences until my brother told me to look at the past, and there I did see, connecting really close dots, that NCIS had had me on their crap list for a long, long time and had, on occasion broken the law.
  Its just too long to go into, and I am tired of the pressure they put on me, but those confidential biographies were files on U. S. citizens, and a strong number would have been of the extremes that NCIS went to, to enforce no gays in the military.  Not all, but a significant number.  And since they broke the law repeatedly (targetting civilians as well as sailors), they could not afford a scandal of that magnitude to embarrass them, the military, the agency itself, and, of course, the President, who sure didn't need a domestic spying scandal.
  I don't know why this case never cracked wide open- it remains stupefying even leaving out what I have said here.  But if it did get exposed, down would go NCIS, and probably the publics belief that the military has handled the issue with sober policies and sanity.  They didn't.  They bashed gays.  Civilians and military. Here in Norfolk.  And the chances of that ever coming out are...zilch.
   Even so, those who want a change in treatment of gays fighting for our country, should go for the weak link----and that weak link is the abusive handling of the enforcement of policies, with or without the evidence Ariel Weinmann stole.  Hit there, and you will get the homophobes where they are at risk, and that is--where they have broken the law.
  Damn.  I even used to like watching the t.v. show "NCIS".  Now, it makes me sick to see an agency built on bashing gays---glamorized.

tonydude, just wanted to say that I appreciated reading both of your
posts here.  Quite interesting.

    Darn.  Let me simplify the above post by just leaving my own experiences out of it.  The prior policy, of no gays in the military, was enforced by a police/intelligence agency whose mission it was to hunt down gays.  Think of the mentality involved, as they gathered in their offices and briefing rooms. They had to be sick to even hold a job like that.  Well, the policy has changed, but it's still....the same people.  They didn't fire them. And you're still paying their salaries with your taxes.
  Please consider going for the weak link, and that has got to be NCIS and related bureaucracies.  Ask your congrssional reps for a thorough review, going all the way back, of whether they abided by the rule of law as they enforced whatever policy was there.  Do you really think they did?  And if the review were thorough, the American people would probably be nauseated at the snooping, the use of snitches, the voyeuristic tendencies, the use of lures, all to hunt down....gay people.  Target the policy and you have a long, long battle.  Target the weak link in all this, the enforcers, and you have the country in general agreement---something is very sick there, and needs reform.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: milomorris on March 29, 2008, 02:22:04 PM
Yeah, the policy is--if a person is straight, we mention it--no one has a
problem with that. 

Not really. If a straight man dies and leaves behind no wife (ex-wife, or girlfriend) or children, we have no idea what his sexual orientation is.

Mark Bingham,  who was on the ill-fated flight
93 on 9/11 was gay, we know that, but how is that germaine to that
particular story?  (I know why it is to "me".)

Bingham's sexuality has nothing to do with the events of 9/11. Its an "oh...by the way..." that makes some people feel good.

In this case I think it's appropriate in the larger sense because the
American people should know there's gay people in the military, despite
the insipid policy.

I totally agree with that. And I think that individual members of the military should be able to make their own choices about whether they want to come forward publicly. Rogers can't make that decision any more.


Disregarding the affected person, the gay & straight public at large is served by outing gay people. 

You might be right that the public might be served by outings. But what about the people in the subjects life that might not know?? Don't they deserve the personal touch of the outed person to help them understand what is going on? Shouldn't a man's right to come out in his own way--how, when, and to whom he choses--supercede whatever potential service to the public an outing in the press might bring?? I think so.

Milo
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: BayCityJohn on March 29, 2008, 02:45:49 PM
Public Death, Private Life


By Deborah Howell
Sunday, March 30, 2008; Page B06

Rogers abided by "don't ask, don't tell" only because "he wanted to stay a soldier," Smith said. "He was first and foremost a soldier, and he loved serving his country." Rogers's ties to the veterans group were "widely and publicly known." Austin Rooke, Rogers's friend and a former Army captain, said, "He was among the most open active-duty military people I've ever met. I can't imagine him not wanting people to know."

It was clear that Maj. Rogers led as openly gay a life as was possible, given his military service. He worked for a gay rights organization, had gay friends and patronized D.C.-area gay clubs. It's unfortunate The Post . . . chose not to present a full picture of this brave man's life."

The Post was right to be cautious, but there was enough evidence -- particularly of Rogers's feelings about "don't ask, don't tell" -- to warrant quoting his friends and adding that dimension to the story of his life. The story would have been richer for it.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/28/AR2008032803062.html?sub=AR (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/28/AR2008032803062.html?sub=AR)
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: milomorris on March 29, 2008, 02:52:06 PM
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/28/AR2008032803062.html?sub=AR (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/28/AR2008032803062.html?sub=AR)

So they changed their minds, I see, based on speaking with people who knew him well. Fair enough. Now it makes sense to me.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: BayCityJohn on March 29, 2008, 03:04:55 PM
Maj. Rogers was also an active member of the American Veterans For Equal Rights Discussion Group on Yahoo.

He posted under the names 'Alan' and "A R'

Here's one of his posts:

----------------------------------------------
Ray,

I will volunteer on Sunday afternoon, ideally 2-4pm.
Please get back to me to effect link up for banner
transfer. Thanks again for coordinating this effort!

Alan

--- chat savvy <chatsavvy1@...> wrote:
> Hi all...
>
> I wanted to put out another request for volunteers
> to help staff the table we will be sharing
> with SLDN at the Black Pride 2005 Festival on
> Sunday, May 29...
>

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/averdcdiscussions/message/93 (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/averdcdiscussions/message/93)
---------------------------------------------------

I would definitely say he was out and involved.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: captainlarab on March 29, 2008, 05:54:52 PM
Hi, I'm the friend of Alan Rogers who sent this article to Dave Cullen.  Here's the response from the Washington Post Ombudsman, whom I understand spoke with Alan's friend Tony Smith at length several days ago:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/28/AR2008032803062.html?sub=AR

Here's a letter I sent to the WP ombudsman earlier today, although I doubt it had any impact on the story, which was probably already written by that point.  This should give you all some additional context:

To the Ombudsman:

I am one of the approximately dozen individuals from the D.C. gay community who attended Alan Rogers' burial at Arlington Cemetery on March 14. Donna St. George spoke to me at length about Alan's life in preparing her story for the Washington Post, and I referred her to several other of his gay friends who were also in attendance at the burial, and at the social gathering that occurred that night.
 
Alan clearly had scores of friends and lived a rich and multifaceted life. Some of us were closer to Alan on a personal level than others, and I don't think any of us from the gay community expected or would have wanted Ms. St. George to make his ties to the gay community or his sexual orientation the *focus* of the article. In fact, several of us had already agreed well in advance of Alan's burial that this was not the time or place to advance any sort of organizational cause or political agenda. Any of a number of us could have issued a press release on behalf of one of our respective organizations and chose not to. We were not even expecting a pronouncement that Alan was gay. What we were expecting, however, was that our cherished memories of Alan would be celebrated and honored along with everyone else's.
 
I can't imagine how inclusion of these memories would have disrespected Alan's memory. I told Ms. St. George that Alan had served as the membership coordinator for the D.C. Chapter of American Veterans for Equal Rights (AVER), which she had already learned from others was a predominantly gay and lesbian military veterans' association. I told her how successful he had been in that role, and, while I had learned only recently that Alan was an ordained minister, I was not surprised, because he had a minister's knack for bringing diverse groups of people together into a community. I forwarded to Ms. St. George (via Sharon Alexander at the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network) e-mails that Alan had sent to the AVER chapter, coordinating visits to the Soldier's and Sailor's Home so we could bring care packages to the elderly veterans there. Patrick High, another former AVER officer, spoke with Ms. St. George about Alan's love of carrot cake, and how Patrick, who corresponded with Alan via e-mail while he was in Iraq, had promised to bake him a carrot cake upon his return from Iraq.
 
When I finally saw the story, I was floored. What saddened and disappointed me so much with the final result is that the Post didn't just bury the fact of his sexual orientation, it appears to have gone to some lengths to excise an entire portion of his life. Not a single one of us was quoted on *any* topic. It's as if our relationship and friendships with this person we loved and admired so deeply had never existed. The explanation we were offered is that there wasn't any "proof" that Alan was gay, or "evidence" that he would have wanted to be known as gay. With regard to the former, I find this deeply ironic, although somewhat beside the point. I can assure you, the "proof" we had of Alan's sexual orientation would have been more than sufficient to have expelled him from the military pursuant to the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy, had any of us chosen to share our information with the Army prior to his death. With regard to the latter, I would submit to you that a gay active duty Army officer who writes his master's thesis on the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy and then holds elected office in a predominantly gay and lesbian veterans' organization is not someone you should assume has any sort of shame or inner conflict over his sexual orientation. I specifically told Ms. St. George that Alan told me, with respect to his taking office in AVER, that he was just so delighted that he had finally found something he could do for the gay community that was consistent with his Army obligations. How one would extrapolate from that that Alan had concerns about revealing his sexual orientation, other than those concerns that were driven by the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy, is beyond me.
 
Anyone who didn't know Alan was gay didn't know Alan very well. To a person, everyone I talked to at the social gathering at March 14 was well aware of his sexual orientation and had absolutely no problem with it. One of his friends noted that, while his Christian faith remained important to him throughout his life, he had no problems reconciling that faith with the fact that he was gay. Several friends also mentioned that Alan was not at all close to his surviving relatives and considered his friends to be his family. Nonetheless, for that one gathering, friends and relatives from all parts of Alan's life were finally able to meet each other and honor his life as one, to put the pieces together with our respective memories of him and to realize what a tremendous human being he had been to touch all of our lives. I was so honored and touched to have been a part of that gathering. That feeling of unity, of inclusion, was completely lost in the write-up that appeared in the Post.
 
While I feel that the story was disrespectful to Alan's gay friends, ultimately, the person the Post disrespected the most was Alan. The Post was given a rare opportunity to share with the world a unique story about a very special human being. What you have denied to Alan in death was deny exactly what the Army had denied him all his life: a chance to, for once, cease all the obsessive compartmentalization that the military has required of all of us who have had to serve in silence, and integrate all aspects of his life into a seamless whole.
 
Lara Ballard
Washington, DC
Captain, U.S. Army Air Defense Artillery, 1991-1995
Former National Treasurer and D.C. Chapter Vice President, American Veterans for Equal Rights


Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Dave Cullen on March 29, 2008, 07:44:19 PM
The W Post ombudsman response was kind of maddening.

I think she came to the right conclusion about this story in the end, but there was a lot of rationalizing, and I didn't see any sign that anyone there has considered the possibility that the Post's policy is the problem.

I was really glad to see that the writer, Donna St. George, did have more enlightened instincts than her editors, and did include his sexuality in the version she wrote.

I'm saddened to hear Downie's response. He clearly doesn't see it at all from a gay person's perspective.

And proving that someone is gay is typically not very hard. I faced that very challenge during the Republican National Convention in 2000. I broke the story that Mary Cheney was gay in Salon, and about two days later, her mother, Lynne Cheney appeared on "This Week With Sam Donaldson and Cokie Roberts," and Cokie asked Lynne about it, and Lynne ripped her a new one, insisting that Mary had never said she was gay. My editor sent me back into the field to make sure there was "proof." It took me about an hour or two to come up with about ten people who would say, on the record, that Mary had said so to them, in some explicit way, such as introducing them to Heather as her wife. (We made the decision that journalistically, a person who was female and had a wife could be safely classified as lesbian.)

But I also distinctly remember how embarassing it was making the calls, because it was such a straight-person question to ask. I recall one source sort of rolling his eyes (the phone equivalent), and saying, "What do straight people think, exactly, that we walk up to each other and say, 'Hi, I'm Mary, and I'm lesbian'?" it's just not how it works.)

still, i understand their need for proof, but i guess that's the root of the problem here: they still view gayness as some sort of taboo, where evidence is required, and we just walk around amongst each other knowing. we do not have gay documents that we request of each other: "let me see your papers!" editors like downie demanding evidence or "proof" suggest he's inhabiting a very different world than ours. i'd really like to introduce him to ours. i'm sure he's got lots of gay friends--but his response suggests that perhaps he knows lots of gay people but has not fully comprehended their lives.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Dave Cullen on March 29, 2008, 07:57:37 PM
Yeah, the policy is--if a person is straight, we mention it--no one has a
problem with that.  If they are gay, we have meetings and decide wether
it is germaine to the story. 

thanks. exactly. i think that policy made sense for awhile, but it is outdated, and time for The Post to re-examine it.

on the surface, it sounds reasonable--nothing should be reported unless germaine. but the truth is that every story is a collection of all sorts of interesting facts and details, many of which would have trouble passing the "germaine" test. (is the gender of the person involved even germaine in most cases? should we lop off personal pronouns, because they impart information which is not germaine?)

this story is a great case in point: it featured all sorts of material about his childhood, hobbies, aspects of his personality . . . it was all about the sorted details of his life. yet a major part of his career struggle was staying in the closet and fooling much of his work peers about his real social life and romantic life, and that's not germaine? or has to pass a test about germanity? (is that a word? hehehe.)

i think the Post policy forces reference to sexuality it to meet a standard that few if any other aspects of a person's life require. it has turned into another way of making us (gay people) invisible, by hushing up who we are unless a germaine rule can be met.

the Post ombudsman quotes the stylebook going much further: "When identifying an individual as gay or homosexual, be cautious about invading the privacy of someone who may not wish his or her sexual orientation known."

again, that sounds like a great and enlightened policy for, say, the 1950s or even 1970s. in the 2000s, it's kind of insulting.

don't think so? try substituting one word in each clause, and reading it now: ""When identifying an individual as jewish, be cautious about invading the privacy of someone who may not wish his or her religious orientation known."

(and of course, lots of other words will due. how about a light-skinned african american, who can pass as white. ". . . be cautious about invading the privacy of someone who may not wish his or her racial background known."

it's a true statement--they may not wish people to know they're jewish, but it also suggests a level of shame and fear and embarassment which was probably true in the gay community in the 70s, but is not today.

it's just revolting to me that they're still treating us like lepers. they're trying to do the right thing, but time has moved on, and it's insulting.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Dave Cullen on March 29, 2008, 08:19:59 PM
Hi, I'm the friend of Alan Rogers who sent this article to Dave Cullen.  Here's the response from the Washington Post Ombudsman, whom I understand spoke with Alan's friend Tony Smith at length several days ago:
. . .
 
Lara Ballard
Washington, DC
Captain, U.S. Army Air Defense Artillery, 1991-1995
Former National Treasurer and D.C. Chapter Vice President, American Veterans for Equal Rights

thanks very much for bringing it to my attention, and for posting, lara.

the longer i think about this, the angrier i become. perhaps it should just be frustration. i have seen len downie on charlie rose and other shows many times, and i have no doubt that he is a thoughtful man with a big heart, trying to do the right thing. but between his response and the insulting passage in the Post stylebook, i think they are stuck in a mode which has passed them by.

i suddenly picture myself as a woman, 20 years after they were given the right to vote, reading a passage from a newspaper manual directing them on how to treat women written 30 years earlier, in a way that was probably enlightened at the time, but now feels incredibly condescending.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on March 30, 2008, 05:26:57 PM

Disregarding the affected person, the gay & straight public at large is served by outing gay people. 

You might be right that the public might be served by outings. But what about the people in the subjects life that might not know?? Don't they deserve the personal touch of the outed person to help them understand what is going on? Shouldn't a man's right to come out in his own way--how, when, and to whom he choses--supercede whatever potential service to the public an outing in the press might bring?? I think so.

Milo

Well, if people are breaking the law or wrongdoing, like Eliot Spitzer, it comes out, regardless as
to what their friends or relatives think or know or are told in advance.  In my opinion, being gay in
itself is not wrong so the family can get over it.  It's fear based and life is messy .
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: captainlarab on March 30, 2008, 08:02:36 PM
I've been going through the old messages from our AVER DC Yahoo group and have found several that were posted by Alan.  Reading them made me realize all the more what a special and courageous person Alan was for his involvement with AVER, and all the more certain that this is precisely how he would have liked to have been remembered.  Alan probably had the least internalized homophobia and greatest commitment to gay activism of all the gay and lesbian military servicemembers I have ever run across (and that's quite a few).  Even the veterans tend to keep gay activism at arms' length, since the habit of compartmentalizing one's life is apparently so hard to break for so many of them.  Dave, you can probably appreciate the uniqueness of Alan's activism all the more given the piece you wrote on gay officers a few years back for Salon--would any of the subjects of your article have come within 10 miles of a group like AVER?  And yet, here was this active duty military intelligence officer, coordinating social events for gay servicemembers and veterans, sharing his insights from inside the Pentagon, volunteering to staff our sign-up booth at the DC Pride festival, and doing whatever he could to get DADT repealed.  As his friend Shay Hill remarked (which was quoted by the WP ombudsman), he was someone who liked to work things from the inside.  Yes, but he did so by passing information to activists, lobbyists and policy makers on the outside--like the folks at SLDN. 

In Alan's own words (just a sampling):

His first posting to the AVER DC yahoo group was on June 11, 2004.  He wrote to us asking for the location of the Pride festival, in a message entitled "Sorry I'm a slacker!"  He wrote, "As I am somewhat new in town, where exactly are the booths going to be set up this weekend? I assume its in the Circle somewhere but not sure exactly where.  Thanks, Alan."  A week later, someone else in the group posted saying that he had met with Alan and was coordinating with Alan and Tony Smith to do some outreach at Baltimore Pride.

On July 2, 2004, Alan wrote, "Just wanted to say thank you to all who attended our monthly Military Happy Hour last evening. It was great meeting so many new faces and reacquainting with so many others. I think the new location that Austin recommended is a hit! Look forward to seeing many of you at our River Tubing Day on Saturday July 17th...look for more info from Austin, our social chairperson, soon! Whatever your
plans, have a happy and safe Independance Day weekend. Alan Rogers."

On August 30, 2004, he posted a message entitled "AVER Membership Renewal Campaign."  He encouraged everyone to pay their membership dues during the month of September and signed it, "Alan Rogers,
Chapter Membership Coordinator."

On September 29, 2004, Patrick High posted an article about how members of the state-only component of the California state militia were being exempted from Don't Ask, Don't Tell by a recently enacted California state statute.  Alan responded, "Patrick, thanks for sharing this article. Wow, what an inspiring step in a long fought fight. Seems to me that this critical legislation will become precedent for other states to adopt similar stances against discimination. Kudos to those state legislators and local activist groups in CA that worked tirelessly to insure the right kind of language was included in the Act."

On October 31, 2004, the incoming president of the AVER DC chapter, Galen Grant, announced the results of the recent chapter elections.  "Alan R.," a "career military intelligence officer," was introduced as the new chapter treasurer.

On December 3, 2004, Galen Grant wrote to the group about coordinating a visit to the VA hospital to bring care packages to the elderly vets, sometime in either December or January.  Alan responded, "Galen:  Jumping on the bandwagon of good ideas here...The holiday season traditionally seems to be the time that many tend to be more giving, charitable and caring about those who are less fortunate due to
poverty, illness or distress of some sort. But the remaining 11 months of the year, those same people remain afflicted and frequently forgotten. Seems to me there is a more lasting value of bringing messages of
hope and cheer year round. I too support a January vet visit following the AVER New Year Brunch that is being coordinated.  Alan."  He then added, "When the idea first came up in our AVER chapter meeting last month, the intent was to maintain a linkage and an identification to our veteran roots...that regardless of our sexual identity, *we are veterans and need to reach out to mainstream veterans as well.*" (emphasis added).

On March 10, 2005, another member of the group posted an op-ed piece that had run in the Army Times, written by an active duty lieutenant colonel and West Point Professor named Allen Bishop (it was entitled "Gays in the Military: A Question of Liberty").  Alan responded, "Thanks for sharing this [name omitted]. Its nice to see active duty field grade officers making a strong case for the repeal of DADT and publishing it in the Army Times. Curious to read some of the backlash the subsequent issues will no doubt contain.  Alan."

Make of this what you will.  All I can say is, there have been several times in the history of gay activism, particularly following the deaths of people like Matt Shepherd or Barry Winchell, where I have been concerned that highlighting the person's sexual orientation might have crossed the line into being exploitative, and/or not necessarily consistent with what that person's wishes might have been.   This was not one of those times.

Again, Dave, thank you for giving us the opportunity to share with you all what a special person Alan was. 

Incidentally, a professor at Georgetown, also affiliated with AVER and SLDN, is trying to obtain a copy of Alan's master's thesis, which was on the topic of Don't Ask, Don't Tell and the impact it has on the retention of military officers.  He hopes to publish it in a compendium of materials.

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: milomorris on March 30, 2008, 10:13:59 PM
the Post ombudsman quotes the stylebook going much further: "When identifying an individual as gay or homosexual, be cautious about invading the privacy of someone who may not wish his or her sexual orientation known."

I think that one of the reasons for this policy is to avoid lawsuits, and to cover their asses in case a reporter makes a mis-step. Someone whose sexuality is mis-identified in the paper might call his/her lawyer. Someone who does not want their sexuality disclosed in the paper might do the same.

This policy might create some watered-down journalism, but it can also serve to protect the company and its assets.

Milo
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: chapeaugris on March 30, 2008, 10:59:21 PM

the Post ombudsman quotes the stylebook going much further: "When identifying an individual as gay or homosexual, be cautious about invading the privacy of someone who may not wish his or her sexual orientation known."

I think that one of the reasons for this policy is to avoid lawsuits, and to cover their asses in case a reporter makes a mis-step. Someone whose sexuality is mis-identified in the paper might call his/her lawyer. Someone who does not want their sexuality disclosed in the paper might do the same.

This policy might create some watered-down journalism, but it can also serve to protect the company and its assets.
My father worked for the Post for 35 years (as a photographer). The editors have to make decisions quickly and will usually err on the side of caution when it involves personal lives. They are not wringing their hands now, regretting their choice. But they will definitely take on board what happened and maybe do things differently if the exact type of case occurs again. As Milo says, it really boils down to a business decision.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: mountain boy on March 31, 2008, 03:52:08 PM
I think it helps a lot to have our stories heard and our truths known. Thanks so much captainlarab and Dave for sharing the rest of Rogers's story with us.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lance on March 31, 2008, 04:10:39 PM
the Post ombudsman quotes the stylebook going much further: "When identifying an individual as gay or homosexual, be cautious about invading the privacy of someone who may not wish his or her sexual orientation known."

I think that one of the reasons for this policy is to avoid lawsuits, and to cover their asses in case a reporter makes a mis-step. Someone whose sexuality is mis-identified in the paper might call his/her lawyer. Someone who does not want their sexuality disclosed in the paper might do the same.

This policy might create some watered-down journalism, but it can also serve to protect the company and its assets.

Milo

What if a gay person is misrepresented as or implied to be straight? Will the news purveyor be sued then? On what grounds?
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: milomorris on March 31, 2008, 05:17:16 PM
What if a gay person is misrepresented as or implied to be straight? Will the news purveyor be sued then? On what grounds?

I don't see why a gay man who is mis-identified couldn't just as easily pick up the phone and call his lawyer. He would have the same grounds that a mis-identified straight guy would have: the paper reported false information about him. A lie is a lie regardless of who the subject is.

Milo
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: captainlarab on March 31, 2008, 05:43:28 PM
A couple more good blog posts about Alan by people who personally knew him:

Tony Smith at http://thegaymilitarytimes.com

Steve Ralls at Bilerico:  http://www.bilerico.com/2008/03/remembering_alan_rogers.php

Here's what's wrong with the WP's policy (and, come to think of it, the Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy):  They're confusing "sexual orientation" with "sex life."  I know, because I went through this with my parents.  I came out to my parents in 1997.  It took them a full 2 years to speak of that conversation again, and when they did (and I asked them whether they were ashamed of me, since clearly they didn't want my aunt and uncle to know), they said, "Well, it's just so personal.  It's just like if your cousin Patricia was into S&M or something.  It's just not something you talk about."  We had a huge fight about it, hardly spoke again for several months afterwards, and it wasn't until my dad went to an MCC church and spoke with an openly gay pastor that the light bulb finally went on in his head.  He wrote me a very nice letter, saying that he had really misunderstood.  The reason he never wanted to talk about my being gay is because he considers his sexuality/bedroom activities to be intensely personal, and he couldn't imagine having such a conversation with me about mine.  But he said, he now understood, I hadn't the slightest inclination to talk about my sex life, I just wanted to be able to talk to him about my *life.* It got much easier after I finally found my life partner, and he could see for himself that our relationship is ultimately based on the same kinds of emotional bonds that my parents' is.

But DADT supporters continue to believe that gays serving "openly" would undermine unit cohesion and morale?  Why?  Because they think that being "open" means I'm going to be sitting in a foxhole with my foxhole buddy regaling him with talk about anal sex until he's ready to throw up.  But that's not what "open" means.  "Open" means, when someone asks me why I've never gotten married, I can give an honest response.  It means I can put pictures of my family on my desk at work.  It means I don't constantly have to be looking over my shoulder to see if my employer is taking any note of who I hang out with.

And the WP makes the same mistake.  Sure, if Alan's gay friends had come forward to the Post with tales about his bedroom habits and sexual conquests, I could see where someone on staff would say to himself, "Gee, is this really how this guy would want to be remembered publicly?"  But not a one of us had a thing to say about his romantic or sexual life.  Instead, we talked about what he had done for our AVER chapter, how he believed DADT was discriminatory, how he helped us organize visits to the VA hospital and how he loved carrot cake--and THIS is too racy for the WP?  This is "intensely private?" 
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: tonydude on March 31, 2008, 05:52:24 PM
    On the question of when a person's sexual orientation is relevant, I remember the ex-marine who saved President Ford's life in San Fransisco.  He was "outted" and his family rejected him.
   I think he had a right not to be outted, in that he felt he did, and saw no connection between his sexuality and his heroism.  Afterwards, though, the issue was more clear - the ugliness done to him made for a fuller news story that definitely needed to be told.
  It is always a painful dilemma, though.  Which took precedence in the original situation, his personal need to deal with his sexuality and his family's prejudice as he saw fit, or the larger needs of the gay community to break free of stereotypes and oppression?  Am not sure if he was discharged for being gay, and that would alter the equation completely.  Not good enough for the Marine Corps, but good enough to risk his life wrestling with a woman who had a dead bead on the President?
  That was a long time ago.  I don't remember all the details.  I do hope he made it through.  So many issues entangled there, but, these years later, the one remains:  he was a hero, he used his military training expertly, he prevented a national catastrophe, and yet....I doubt the Corps would have had him back, and I doubt they even have pride they ought to have that when danger struck, a Marine saved the day. Because he was gay, they did not have the honor to do the right thing -- salute him.  Sorry, the gays-in-the-military issue brought back to mind that very great evil.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on March 31, 2008, 05:56:50 PM
Unfortunately, his life after having saved the life of President Ford was not a happy one.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oliver_Sipple

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: tonydude on March 31, 2008, 06:07:04 PM
  Ouch.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Dave Cullen on April 02, 2008, 08:58:05 AM
What if a gay person is misrepresented as or implied to be straight? Will the news purveyor be sued then? On what grounds?

exactly. thanks.

i get more and more angry with downie's contention that there was also no evidence that rogers wanted his sexuality known. (first of all there, was substantial evidence--god, how much does it take?) but what infuriates me is that the burden of proof is laid on gay people to prove we don't want our lives censored. where is the substantial proof that rogers wanted to be closeted, once free of the policy he was working to overturn?

obviously, he was forced into the closet by the DADT policy, but he was trying to end that policy.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Dave Cullen on April 02, 2008, 09:05:39 AM
it appears that wikipedia censorship wars have begun on rogers.

i got this email this morning:

Quote
I guess this shouldn't surprise me, but someone from the Army Information Systems Command at the Pentagon attempted to censor an article about Major Alan G. Rogers on Wikipedia.

The article is here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Major_Alan_G._Rogers

The comments section is here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Major_Alan_G._Rogers

Basically, I started this article with very rough information a few days ago.  Yesterday, an anonymous person logging in from IP address 141.116.168.135, which I found (doing a WHOIS on the IP address) corresponds to an Army computer at the Pentagon, logged into Wikipedia, deleted most of the content relating to Alan's work in the gay community including the following:


Rogers funeral gained publicity, initially, due to the grim coincidence that the US military has reached the “sad Iraq milestone” of 4,000 dead. His death gained further media attention when it was revealed that he was gay and worked to end the military's "Don't Ask Don't Tell" (DADT) policy.
Alan was an officer in the D.C. Chapter of the American Veterans for Equal Rights and supported the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network. Alan's thesis at Georgetown University was on the negative impact of DADT on the military. . . .

The anonymous poster also provided the following comments:

Alan's life was not about his sexual orientation but rather about the body of work he performed ministering to others and helping the defense of the country. Quit trying to press an agenda that Alan wouldn't have wanted made public just to suit your own ends. 141.116.168.135 (talk) 19:40, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

i have been a periodic contributor to wikipedia, and added this comment to the Talk page:

Quote
The censorship was unfortunate, and hopefully will end. The Washington Post ombudsman has stated on the paper's website that there was more than sufficient evidence that Rogers was gay. That, in itself, is an acceptable source.

It seems preposterous to me that including biographical information--such as the person's master's thesis, or their number of siblings, or sexuality (either explicitly, or implicity, eg, listing a wife or mentioning a boyfriend) would be an agenda. Biographical data is listed routinely, and it's the exclusion of it which constitutes an agenda. And it's quite presumptous for any wiki editor to decide what Rogers' life was "about," and therefore which parts of his life should be excluded.

It's good to see the original material restored. Dave Cullen (talk) 14:52, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

i hope the censorship from the army pc ends. it's important to realize that the involvement of an army pc doesn't necessarily mean "the Army" is against the information being public, just that one person there feels that way.

this "agenda" charge really sticks in my craw, though--especially when the person charging "agenda" is leading one. we exist. get over it. acknowledging our existence is not an agenda, other than the agenda of acknowledging the real world. an attempt to obscure and hide us and pretend we don't exist, now that's an agenda.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Dave Cullen on April 02, 2008, 09:13:01 AM
What if a gay person is misrepresented as or implied to be straight? Will the news purveyor be sued then? On what grounds?

I don't see why a gay man who is mis-identified couldn't just as easily pick up the phone and call his lawyer. He would have the same grounds that a mis-identified straight guy would have: the paper reported false information about him. A lie is a lie regardless of who the subject is.

Milo

milo, we're not talkig about "a lie" here, we're talking about a situation where the paper is unsure of the situation. they--and some others here--came to the conclusion that the "safe," or "respectful" option would be to "err on the side of caution" and assume he's straight. i believe lance's point was: why is straighthood safer, more respectful, or even more cautious? why shouldn't a gay man be just as upset that he was mis-ID'd the other way? the papers "sense of caution" belies the fact that they believe that there is something inherently distasteful about being gay that they cannot risk associating with a human, unless 100 percent sure. but they can risk associating a person with straightness without any concern at all.

and i think your hypothetical response is right out of dreamland. you don't see why the mis-ID'd gay man couldn't pick up the phone and call his lawyer? how about he'd get laughed off the phone? maybe he could call the lawyer, but can you picture this case in court? can you picture a judge ruling in his favor, a jury awarding damages? i'm sure we'll find such a judge and jury someday, somewhere, but 99.9% of them would dismiss the case out of hand. that's the point.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lance on April 02, 2008, 01:20:10 PM
We have a long history in our culture of pretending that gay people do not exist, of hiding them out of sight. People who do not exist have no right to sue, no reason to sue. They do not get a day in court.

Being accused of homosexuality is regarded as an insult, as defamation. Being 'accused' of heterosexuality is thought to be entirely the way things should be, as though it were not an insult, not a rejection of your self. But it is a rejection and an insult. All of which at this time in this society means that we could almost certainly not win a legal suit even if we could bring it to court.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: captainlarab on April 02, 2008, 01:33:02 PM
With regard to the Wikipedia censorship issue:  I agree with you Dave, I find it unlikely that the Army as an institution decided to censor Alan's Wikipedia entry.  The Pentagon IT folks are smart enough to know that you can track down an IP address, and enforcing the DADT policy just isn't worth that kind of trouble.  No, I find this heartbreakingly sad, because I believe this is someone who worked with Alan in the Army and probably considers Alan to have been a close friend.  What's sad about this is, I had friends like this in the Army, dear friends, war buddies.  They thought they knew me, but they didn't.  They shared with me all their trials and tribulations, all their relationship problems, all their hopes and dreams...and thought I was doing the same.  I wasn't.  I was censoring myself, projecting a persona that wasn't entirely me, all because of this stupid policy.  As a result, I'd be willing to bet that, if I got hit by a bus tomorrow, a fair number of them would be saying, "Hey, I knew Lara, and she wouldn't have wanted to talk about her sexual orientation, because as far as I could tell that was a very marginal aspect of her life."  When in fact, it had been a very central part of my life during the entire period that I worked with these people, and was quite psychologically tortured by having to lie and mislead my dear friends.  I've since come out to a number of them, and they've all been supportive, but some were genuinely irritated that I hadn't disclosed this to them earlier.  I think they perceived it as a breach of trust--to which I would say, yes, it was, and one dictated by Army policy.  All those people who, out of genuine concern for my well-being were trying to find me a boyfriend and couldn't understand why any of the guys they suggested were "good enough" for me--I lied to all of them.  My good friends.  The people who would never have lied to me, about anything.  That's what this policy does to people.

The anonymous poster was right--Alan was at heart a minister.  His mission was to alleviate suffering.  And he saw how this policy has made so many people suffer, starting with himself.  Good God, I only had to deal with DADT for 4 years; I never felt the pull of the Army as a genuine career choice, I was just paying off my student loans.  Alan did, and had to develop a 25-year plan for reconciling these two incompatible but very central aspects of his life.  He had to have felt torn in half, and he couldn't tell this friend of his, the Wikipedia poster anything about that.  As a result, the Wikipedia poster is only now learning who his friend Alan really was.

So heartbreaking.   
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: tonydude on April 02, 2008, 03:02:37 PM
    I don't know all the details of the "don't ask - don't tell" policy, but thought I had read it was a sham and there was still gay hunting going on. Aside from that, it seems the military wants the policy to continue past the term of service, or even life span.  In other words, once in the military, you are to remain unidentified as gay, for life. That would help them out greatly, of course, in there being no record of service or heroism from gays that could be part of the discussion on a later change in policy.
  Maybe I've got it wrong, but it does seem they want no record of honorable service from gays, and so want the preposterous - - - control over one's identity and orientation AFTER being in the military.  I hope I am mistaken, but there seems some chance this may be so.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: captainlarab on April 02, 2008, 06:48:43 PM
Well, the military these days is really all over the place on this issue.  Bear in mind, when you say "the military," you're referring to a diverse organization in which not all the members are necessarily of one mindset.  Some old homophobic dinosaur in the Pentagon who hasn't led troops since the 1970s is going to be of one mindset.  A reservist who has plenty of gay friends, gets deployed to Iraq, and can see that the military needs every person it can get its hands on these days is going to have a different mindset.

When DADT was first implemented, and for about 10 years afterwards, there was actually a sharp increase in gay-related discharges as compared to previous policies.  I suspect this was because, whereas before there was a fair amount of command discretion regarding who did and didn't get kicked out, now there was a law that basically said everyone has to go.  But since 2001, the numbers of discharges has dropped dramatically, and while one can only speculate as to why this is the case, certainly, one explanation is that, while in the 1990s the military was trying desperately to draw down its numbers, since 2001 it's had to ramp them right back up.  Anecdotally, what I hear is that there is simply no standard practice anymore regarding who gets kicked out.  Used to be, using a DOD computer to send sweet nothings to your same-sex squeeze was a one-way ticket home.  Now, we have folks left and right trying to "out" themselves just to get out of deploying to Iraq (and God only knows how many of them actually are gay), and their commanders are demanding additional "proof."  Now, that's before they deploy.  See, that's the thing--you can out yourself as gay before you deploy, during your deployment, tell all your colleagues, your commander, etc.  But once you come back and you're a week short of retiring and collecting that military retirement pension--BAM!  You're out on your ear with nothing.  Because at that point, it saves them money not to have to pay you a retirement pension.

Another big no-no is coming out to the national media.  As Randy Shilts wrote in Conduct Unbecoming, the military historically has never been nearly as concerned with there being no gays in the military, as it is with making the American public *think* there are no gays in the military.  So, everyone and their cousin may know you're gay and not care, but the minute you get quoted in an NPR story as saying, "Hey, I'm out as a gay man in Iraq and no one in my unit cares!", you're gone. 

In terms of how the military as an institution actually feels about DADT as a policy, the vibes they're giving off these days seem, at the very least, totally agnostic.  I have it on good information that Rumsfeld thought the policy was a headache and would have been just as happy to be rid of it (the problem was, he was a member of a political party that is beholden to right-wing crazies).  It's a minor headache, to be sure--as the military is fond of pointing out, they discharge far more servicemembers every year for being pregnant or exceeding height/weight standards than for being gay.  And sure, it's cost them a couple hundred million dollars over a 15-year period, but for the Pentagon that's pocket change.  Still, I think most of the powers-that-be there would just as soon go ahead and lift the ban, they just want someone else (preferably the Democrats) to expend the political capital necessary to push through a legislative change.  You look at any DOD official quoted on DADT within the past 5-6 years or so, and they all just completely pass the buck to Congress.  They have absolutely nothing to say in defense of the current policy.  Any military official you see defending the policy is likely a retired military officer who's expressing his own personal viewpoint; he's not affiliated with or speaking on behalf of the Pentagon.  I'm not saying there isn't still opposition within the ranks to having gays serve openly, but at this point it's really among the least of their worries either way.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: milomorris on April 03, 2008, 08:04:28 AM
the papers "sense of caution" belies the fact that they believe that there is something inherently distasteful about being gay that they cannot risk associating with a human, unless 100 percent sure. but they can risk associating a person with straightness without any concern at all.

I don't think that the paper finds anything distasteful about being gay, rather they understand that individuals who they might write about do find it distasteful. Whereby this policy helps to protect and indemnify the paper from the wrath of those individuals should the need arise.

and i think your hypothetical response is right out of dreamland. you don't see why the mis-ID'd gay man couldn't pick up the phone and call his lawyer? how about he'd get laughed off the phone? maybe he could call the lawyer, but can you picture this case in court? can you picture a judge ruling in his favor, a jury awarding damages? i'm sure we'll find such a judge and jury someday, somewhere, but 99.9% of them would dismiss the case out of hand. that's the point.

I don't know if we have a real-life case to examine. But as far I know, newspapers can be held accountable for ANY mis-information they print. Its not what they say that matters, its the fact that what they say is false that matters. They could say that I'm pigeon-toed, and I have just as much right to take punitive action against them as the guy who mis-identified. And don't forget, the point of calling the lawyer is not to get a judgment against the paper in court: the point is to get them to pay you for their mistake. And we all know that lawyers are motivated by the opportunity to earn money. Better for them if the case doesn't go to court because the return on investment is higher.

Milo
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on April 03, 2008, 02:02:55 PM
I don't think that the paper finds anything distasteful about being gay, rather they understand that individuals who they might write about do find it distasteful. Whereby this policy helps to protect and indemnify the paper from the wrath of those individuals should the need arise.

Then this policy helps to perpetuate the notion that there is something
wrong with being gay.  So are there two standards of law for people
that believe there isn't anything wrong with it and those that do?

Is the point that if someone IS gay and the paper says so, but that the
gay person doesn't want to be identified as gay--is this an issue?
Then do you have to prove someone IS gay?  How do you do that?

Well, the military these days is really all over the place on this issue.

I think the military has always been all over the place on this issue.  I
have read and researched extensively on gay soldiers in the military,
particularly in WWII, and one soldier said it best when he stated that
being open or not was like playing roulette.  Some places he was
stationed it was no big deal and you could be quite comfortable with
yourself and others.  In another place you could get arrested, be
locked up in a queer stockade and have your life ruined.

Another big no-no is coming out to the national media.  As Randy Shilts wrote in Conduct Unbecoming, the military historically has never been nearly as concerned with there being no gays in the military, as it is with making the American public *think* there are no gays in the military.

Hence the Jekyll & Hyde treatment of soldiers in this regard.

Speaking personally, when I am in a quiet or meditative moment and
quite comfortable with myself and I see things in a nurturing light, I
find it so unusual that being gay is so thought of as a political issue or
as a religious issue and if we could all live that notion day to day--that
it is not a political/religious issue for ourselves, that others would
come to see it that way as well because you can't make yourself
ashamed of something that you should not be without your own
consent.

In that light, in some of my reading, some military psychiatrists that
dealt with gay soldiers in WWII that were locked up in mental wards
were completely baffled that the soldiers did not see themselves as
doing anything wrong, nor felt guilty or ashamed of themselves.  That
most said they did not feel the need to change themselves, etc.

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: captainlarab on April 03, 2008, 05:46:41 PM
Great book on gay WWII service called Coming Out Under Fire, by the late Allan Berube.

About 6-7 years ago I spearheaded an effort to get the stories of gay and lesbian combat veterans videotaped and submitted to the U.S. Library of Congress Veterans History Project (http://www.loc.gov/folklife/vets).  Paul Jordan, one of the vets who was interviewed (and whose story is consequently now a matter of public record at the Library of Congress) was a WWII vet who had enlisted in 1931.  That made him very unusual, as most WWII vets you meet these days were draftees who entered after the Pearl Harbor attack.  Mr. Jordan, by contrast, was part of the career Army corps that was extremely small in number prior to the Pearl Harbor attack, and also not generally well regarded by American society (he said in the 1930s bars used to have signs in their window saying, "No soldiers or dogs allowed").   For him, it was something he had to do because of the Great Depression.  He knew throughout his military career that he was gay and came across as someone who had absolutely no hang-ups about it (also highly unusual for that particular generation; I know of several lesbian WWII vets and at least two Pearl Harbor survivors, but none of them will come forward for fear of losing their government pensions). 

What Mr. Jordan said about gays in the military was really interesting.  He derided people debating the issue of gays in the military "as if this is something new."  He said that WWII was really the event that brought the issue to the forefront of American public consciousness, because that was the first time millions of draftees came into the military from off of Main Street and the average American really cared what was going on in the military.  Prior to that point, he said, homosexuality was "an accepted aspect of military life, as it had been since ancient times."  He said that "camp followers" used to follow around the ancient armies of Greece and Rome, consisting of prostitutes both female and male, whose job it was to service the troops in whatever way they preferred.  I don't know how much of an expert he really was on ancient Greece and Rome (in fact, I know a classical historian who would probably say he was oversimplifying things a bit), but what I do take as true is the fact that he, a professional soldier, saw a marked change in the military's approach to homosexuality as a result of the draft.  Which is consistent with both Berube's portrayal and the Randy Shilts quote from Conduct Unbecoming. 

Okay, the Washington Blade now has a follow-up piece on the Wikipedia dust-up.  Check it out: 

http://www.washblade.com/thelatest/thelatest.cfm?blog_id=17515

My friend Rob Pilaud has really been keeping up the drum beat on this issue.   
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: chuckyv on April 09, 2008, 01:32:45 AM
Regarding don't ask don't tell,sometimes I get the feeling that acquaintances,not true friends,are curious to know the sexual orientation of a colleague/workmate, not so that they can offer support ,but to then crucify the newly outed person.
The genuine friend would not make an issue out of orientation,but a more casual acquaintance would.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fofol on April 09, 2008, 01:27:56 PM
  Writing as a gay veteran: DA,DT is a sham, the witch hunts do continue, but I've never heard of the policy extending to civilian life.  There are gay vets organizations.  For more accurate information, look up SNDL, Servicemembers National Defense League.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: tonydude on April 10, 2008, 12:17:06 PM
  Dear fofol - with regard to a policy extending to civilian life, there would be one for those who served (and they want them to stay silent) and one, arguably illegal, where they went into the civilian community (gays, not in the military) to pursue what information they could get.
  Have said it before, but it bears repeating- in the pre- DA/DT era, NCIS here in Norfolk aggressively went into the gay community, including gay bars on their witch-hunts, and that this one intelligence/police organization was primarily a very sick outfit enforcing, as their highest priority, the earlier policies, of no gays.
  And I regret to say this, but they could compromise gays, in helping them.  I DO know, they suborned a gay reporter on our local newspaper, and, in return for inside sources for military and other news, he traded off his soul.  I know the guy, and worked with him on a weekly newspaper before he went on to the daily, where he still is.  He's always played gay liberation, but, as I said, was heavily selling out gays in return for help from NCIS on exclusive stories.
  It's just not always true, that being in an oppressed minority makes one a hero or a good person.  We have our uglies, too, who would sell themselves and us out, to advance their career.
Again- from the period 1970-1990, NCIS was engaged in highly unlawful harrassment of civilian gays, and this will never come out because it was tolerated under both Democratic and Republican administrations.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: tonydude on April 11, 2008, 11:18:25 AM
  My last post (above), may have seemed a little strident.  It is difficult for the gay community to believe that government agencies could target gays, for different reasons, and that this is a problem that is of some danger.  It would not be going off-topic to mention political abuses, to support the possibility of gays also being bashed.
  *During the wild aftermath of Watergate, in hearings in Congress, it came out that Army intelligence had a list of 5 million U.S. citizens considered unsafe.  How did they compile that list?
Among other methods, Army intelligence had soldiers reading every daily newspaper, and, if you wrote a letter-to-the-editor against the war ---you got on the list.  Congress was outraged and ordered the files destroyed.
  The point being, Army intelligence's OTHER mission, in the whacky zone, was to keep gays out of the military, just like NCIS.  Can you suppose, then, that they didn't do some of that very same collection of information from the civilian community?
  *More recently, Senator Leahy from Vermont, was going to hold hearings on military harrassment of a group called Veterans for Peace, where the tactics were sordid and unlawful.  The senator lost his guts and wimped out.  The point, again, being, those veterans were no longer under the jurisdiction of the military and yet were being hounded. Which goes to the related issue of, if you are a gay vet, are you still subject to their interest?
  Please note, I am using examples of political issues, where the military intelligence agencies went whacko.  That's political stuff.  But it IS relevant, in that these same agencies are tasked with enforcing the policies on gays, and if you can see how unlawful they can get, and invasive of the civilian community on political stuff, you might then re-consider the possibility they have been extremely weird and unlawful....with us.  Please keep an open mind.  And also remember the mentality necessary for such a focus.  It would not occur in the FBI, CIA, or NSA.
They aren't tasked with witch-hunts.  The military intelligence agencies have been, in the past.  May God help us all, but agencies assigned to protect our bases from terrorist attacks, may well be still bogged down in the incredibly sick, grotesque mind-set of one of their original missions --- track gays in the military, and, as needed, go into the civilian community to do so.
  Dont ask/Don't tell  ---is temporary, and they know it.  They're still the same people who enforced the earlier policies, and they are....sick.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on April 13, 2008, 04:55:25 PM
  My last post (above), may have seemed a little strident.  It is difficult for the gay community to believe that government agencies could target gays, for different reasons, and that this is a problem that is of some danger.  It would not be going off-topic to mention political abuses, to support the possibility of gays also being bashed.

I don't think your post was strident and from what I have learned about
this issue, not difficult to believe at all.  Thank you for sharing your
insights.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Dave Cullen on April 14, 2008, 09:19:16 AM
Well, the military these days is really all over the place on this issue.  Bear in mind, when you say "the military," you're referring to a diverse organization in which not all the members are necessarily of one mindset. 

this was really a great post, top to bottom.

i also feel uneasy when people try ascribing a particular viewpoint or even MO on "the military," because it is a huge and diverse body.

i've been out of the army for twenty years, and still have several friends in, but of course each one lives on in a particular post, working in a particular branch, so i get only snapshots of different areas. your post was really great in providing a great overview of the situation, and how it has evolved.

and it fits snugly with everything i have picked up over the years, and filled in some holes for me. thanks.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on July 01, 2008, 01:41:56 PM
This is being screened at OUTFEST, the Los Angeles LGBT Film Festival:
 
Ask Not
USA | 2008 | 73 mins
Documentary Features

More than 12,000 military service members have been discharged since "Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell" was enacted in 1993. ASK NOT examines the impact of this law on the U.S. and the ensuing problems.

SAT 7/19 5:00pm
DGA 2   
$12.00   

SUN 7/20 4:30pm
Fairfax 2   
$12.00   

http://www.outfest.org/tixSYS/2008/filmguide/title-detail.php

© 2008 OUTFEST
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: graylockV on July 07, 2008, 10:21:39 PM
Yet another positive study - wonder if it helps this time:

Military gays don't undermine unit cohesion

By ANNE FLAHERTY, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON - Congress should repeal the "don't ask, don't tell" law because the presence of gays in the military is unlikely to undermine the ability to fight and win, according to a new study released by a California-based research center.

The study was conducted by four retired military officers, including the three-star Air Force lieutenant general who in early 1993 was tasked with implementing President Clinton's policy that the military stop questioning recruits on their sexual orientation.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080708/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/military_gays
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: jack on July 07, 2008, 11:15:42 PM
what surprises me is that this is new now... unless it is ANOTHER report.  the military assessment i am thinking of was unearthed ages ago, after being shunted into a black hole by the current administration for a number years.  foia can prove very enlightening if you know the right questions to ask.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on July 08, 2008, 11:24:07 AM
Quote
Supporters of the ban contend there is still no empirical evidence that allowing gays to serve openly won't hurt combat effectiveness.  "The issue is trust and confidence" among members of a unit, said Lt. Col. Robert Maginnis, who retired in 1993 after working on the issue for the Army. When some people with a different sexual orientation are "in a close combat environment, it results in a lack of trust," he said.

This unit cohesion thing is so much b.s.  What about a gay soldier in the
trenches wondering about being found out so he won't get discharged or
blackmailed?  Why doesn't that disrupt unit cohesion as well?  Why is it
always the gay person who might disrupt unit cohesion?  If a straight guy
is so worried about the sexuality of someone next to him in a combat
situation then he's surely been trained badly and a poor soldier.   What
does Col. Maginnis think is going to happen?  In the midst of a hail of
bullets the gay soldier is going to cop a feel or something?
It's so assinine.  And ten.

Col. Maginnis:  "Use assinine in a sentence.

Gay Soldier:  "I gave his face a 2, but I give his assinine."

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Flyboy on July 15, 2008, 01:53:09 PM
I shouldn't laugh, I know, Lyle, but that was hilarious! thanks!
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: graylockV on July 19, 2008, 05:48:26 PM
Attitudes Toward 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' Policy Radically Change

Poll: Broad Support for Gays in Military Including from Conservatives and Evangelicals
ANALYSIS by EMILY B. GUSKIN
July 19, 2008

On the 15th anniversary of "don't ask, don't tell," three-quarters of Americans support allowing gays to serve in the military, whether they "tell" or not -- much broader support than existed when the compromise policy was put in place.

All told, 78 percent in this ABC News/Washington Post poll say homosexuals who don't reveal their sexual orientation should be allowed to serve. Moreover, in a rejection of the current policy, about as many, 75 percent, also favor service by homosexuals who do disclose their orientation.

http://abcnews.go.com/PollingUnit/Politics/story?id=5387980&page=1
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: michaelflanagansf on July 23, 2008, 08:06:25 PM
Finally!  A logical proposal for the all lesbian army....

Lawmakers Sympathetic To “Don't Ask” Repeal
By Carlos Santoscoy
Published: July 23, 2008

Rep. Vic Snyder (D-Arkansas) was outraged at Donnelly's statement that gays and lesbians should be barred from service because they represent an increased “potential for HIV.” Snyder called the claim “just bonkers.” And went on to say that by that logic the military should only recruit lesbians, as they represent the lowest HIV risk.

http://ontopmag.com/article.aspx?id=2071&MediaType=1&Category=26
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: jack on July 24, 2008, 01:09:45 AM
it would probably be a more effective fighting force as well, on so MANY levels ...   ;)
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: jack on July 27, 2008, 09:18:51 AM
SUPERBarticle on the DADT hearings and the lunacy of donnelly and her net retrograde effect on the defenders of DADT.  she may have single-handedly undermined the policy for once and for all.  stunning in her bloviality.  in fact, a saturday night live skit that needs no editing, just replay it.

the article has links to many other comments and videos of the hearing.

ENJOY !!  :D

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/jul/25/gayrights.usa?referrer=www.ukgaynews.org.uk
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: jack on July 27, 2008, 10:12:31 AM
here's a working link, since the congresses link is mysteriously broken.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5885599559697174178&q=house+armed+services+hearing++gays&ei=R5mMSITyOKeuqQLa1pDCDA&hl=en
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: BayCityJohn on July 28, 2008, 03:38:56 PM


Quote
Not long ago, most Americans thought the military was no place for gay people. They've since changed their minds. All it took was 15 years, two wars, Ellen DeGeneres, a military recruitment crisis, "Brokeback Mountain" and a multistate debate about gay marriage and civil unions, plus a lot of uncomfortable soul-searching.

Now the public appears more than ready to drop the controversial federal "don't ask, don't tell" policy, which forbids gay people from serving openly in the military.

The question is whether our leaders are ready to follow.

http://www.oregonlive.com/editorials/oregonian/index.ssf?/base/editorial/1216682713310420.xml&coll=7 (http://www.oregonlive.com/editorials/oregonian/index.ssf?/base/editorial/1216682713310420.xml&coll=7)
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: KittyHawk on July 28, 2008, 06:29:10 PM
There's an in-depth article in the July 28th issue of The New Yorker that discusses the Don't Ask Don't tell policy in light of "the first [known] gay soldier to die in Iraq", Alan Rogers.

A SOLDIER’S LEGACY
Don’t ask, don’t tell, but Alan Rogers was a hero to everyone who knew him.
by Ben McGrath

There's also a chance to ask McGrath questions about Rogers for this week only, I believe.

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/08/04/080804fa_fact_mcgrath
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: atruant on August 11, 2008, 03:46:25 PM
Lydia, Michael, John and jack,

Thanks for these insightful links. I had many USAF friends during my career, but of course I didn't know if any of them were gay.....

One hopes the next (Democrat) administration will quash the 'wingnuttiness' of DADT.

John
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: graylockV on November 17, 2008, 10:52:25 PM

104 retired military brass against 'don't ask-don't tell'


 WASHINGTON (CNN) -- More than 100 retired U.S. military leaders -- including the former head of the Naval Academy -- have signed a statement calling for an end to the military's "don't ask-don't tell" policy, according to a California-based think tank that supports the movement.

Retired Adm. Charles Larson, the former Naval Academy superintendent, tops the list of 104 retired general and admirals who want the government to repeal the policy, the Palm Center at the University of California, Santa Barbara, announced Monday.

 The report also noted the policy has forced out of the military some very talented personnel and put commanders in the position of breaking the law or damaging the unit's cohesion by forcing out "qualified, meritorious" service members.

A recent Washington Post/ABC News poll found that 75 percent of respondents supported allowing gays to serve openly in the military, up from 62 percent in 2001 and 44 percent in 1993.

To meet its goals of increasing numbers, the military has recruited thousands of convicted felons and illegal drug users under its "moral waivers" program, the report noted, while dismissing hundreds more for being gay.

The statement signed by Larson and other top brass reads:

"We -- the undersigned -- respectfully call for the repeal of the 'don't ask-don't tell' policy. Those of us endorsing this letter have dedicated our lives to defending the rights of our citizens to believe whatever they wish. Scholarly data shows there are approximately 1 million gay and lesbian veterans in the United States today as well as 65,000 gays and lesbians currently serving in our armed forces. They have served our nation honorably. We support the recent comments of former chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Gen. John Shalikashvili, who has concluded that repealing the 'don't ask-don't tell' policy would not harm and would indeed help our armed forces. As is the case with Great Britain, Israel and other nations that allow gays and lesbians to serve openly, our service members are professionals who are able to work together effectively despite differences in race, gender, religion and sexuality. Such collaboration reflects the strength and the best traditions of our democracy."

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/11/17/dont.ask.dont.tell/index.html
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on November 24, 2008, 05:55:11 PM
Obama punting on gays in the military repeal

Quote
Obama punting on gays in the military repeal
-Matthew Berger
24 Nov 2008
The Washington Times reports the Obama administration may wait until
at least 2010 before pushing through Congress an end to the military's
 "don't ask, don't tell" policy towards gays and lesbians.

While Obama campaigned to the gay community on a repeal - which would
allow gays and lesbians to serve freely - it is not surprising that he is placing
the issue on the backburner.

It's not surprising because we ALWAYS get put on the backburner.

Quote
For one, the LGBT community is at a period of weakness, coming off losses in
California and Florida on propositions to outlaw gay marriage. By focusing initially
on an issue prominent in the LGBT community, Obama would be essentially ignoring
the message he received from two states that helped get him elected, which supported
a Democratic candidate but did not back steps forward in gay rights. A repeal now would
be perceived as an appeal to a liberal base at a time when he should be reaching out to
moderates, including religious moderates for whom gay issues remain a touchy subject.
[snip]
By punting the issue, though, it reopens the perennial question - is there ever a right time
to make a big move on gay rights.


What do we want?
Gay rights.
When do we want them?
NOW.

More here:
http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/11/obama_punting_on_gays_in_the_m.php
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on January 06, 2009, 01:30:06 PM
From TDS:
Quote
Calling for Patience on DADT
“‘(Repealing Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell) ought to be re-examined and it ought to be on the agenda, but it shouldn’t be very high on the agenda,’ said Sen. Carl Levin (D-MI). ‘There are just too many other more important things to do.’
“A cautious non-approach to this was also supported by Brad Luna, communications director for the Human Rights Campaign, the country’s largest gay-rights group. ‘There is a strategically correct way to go about this,’ said Luna. ‘This policy has been in place for a number of years. It’s not going to be repealed overnight.’”

Patience is a code word for go sit in the back of the bus.  It irks me when
people say that.  ESPECIALLY when they say it without a plan in effect.  There
currently is no plan to deal with this issue, just some vague references that it
should be considered.  Tell all those people who keep being discharged from
the military to be patient.  Sometimes enough is enough.

And I seem to remember that during his campaign Obama said that a President
should be able to do more than one thing at a time.  At a time when the services
need all the members they can get, why isn't it the time to try to keep them all
there?

Don't rate me as less than worthy by saying there are more important things
right now.  Gay people are always being told to be patient.  If you read
all the comments to the article link, you will see that 99% of them are totally
against this not lmow stance.  And you expect me to believe that the issue
would be taken up again in 2011 when Obama will be gearing up to run for
President again?  Not likely.  Then it will be be patient, you'll have to wait until
after the election.


It is my understanding that, whereas before the DADT policy came into being,
the President could have handled this with the stroke of a pen, now the DADT
policy has to be dealt with somehow before it can be gotten rid of.  Some of the
replies to the article say that there is an expiration date on it where it will elapse
or something.  Does anyone know the particulars of this?  When I argue about it
I want to know what i'm talking about.

There is a Gays in the Military thread where this discussion should probably
continune if anyone wants to (and talk about the possible appointment of a
gay man as Secretary of the Navy, as well):

http://www.davecullen.com/forum/index.php?topic=4767.150
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on January 19, 2009, 02:25:39 PM
On a recent YouTube posting, incoming White House Press Secretary
Robert Gibbs answered the gays-in-the-military question with a single
word. "Thaddeus of Lansing, Mich., asks, 'Is the new administration
going to get rid of the "don't ask, don't tell policy?" ' " said Gibbs,
looking directly into the camera. "Thaddeus, you don't hear a
politician give a one-word answer much. But it's 'yes.' "


http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/01/18/EDEU15BU9O.DTL
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Castro on January 20, 2009, 02:25:33 PM
This concerns way more than the military.  It's the new administration's statement on civil rights, with special attention to LGBT issues:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/agenda/civil_rights/ (http://www.whitehouse.gov/agenda/civil_rights/)

Cheers!

Now we just watch to see how this is implemented.  And maybe do our best to help - letters to congressional delegations, etc.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on January 21, 2009, 04:09:10 PM

from the Military's Stars & Stripes reporter:

President, first lady outshine entertainment
stars at the military’s inaugural celebration

By Kevin Baron, Stars and Stripes
Mideast edition, Thursday, January 22, 2009

Comedian George Lopez served as master of ceremonies, and promptly
joked that one of Obama’s first orders of duty would be to end the "don’t ask,
don’t tell" policy for gays in the military.

"So tonight, feel free to dance with anyone you like!" he quipped, drawing a
mix of nervous chuckles and a few cheers.


http://www.stripes.com/article.asp?section=104&article=60160
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Flyboy on January 26, 2009, 10:10:35 AM
Lyle, I hadn't heard about this comment from Lopez.........haha............yeah, I BET there was plenty of nervous laughter in that room..............we'll see how this all plays out in the next four years..........
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: atruant on May 09, 2009, 06:53:27 PM
Check out this link, folks. I love it! This guy has balls.

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/politics/2009/05/08/am.interview.dan.choi.cnn
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on May 09, 2009, 07:12:35 PM
He does indeed, John.

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Ennis Del Mark on May 09, 2009, 08:58:56 PM
He does indeed.  More power to you, Dan!  Give 'em hell!

Thanks for the link, John.

Mark
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: BayCityJohn on May 12, 2009, 03:00:15 PM
By Lt. Daniel Choi
Special to CNN

Open Letter to President Obama and Every Member of Congress:



Quote
I have learned many lessons in the ten years since I first raised my right hand at the United States Military Academy at West Point and committed to fighting for my country. The lessons of courage, integrity, honesty and selfless service are some of the most important.

At West Point, I recited the Cadet Prayer every Sunday. It taught us to “choose the harder right over the easier wrong” and to “never be content with a half truth when the whole can be won.” The Cadet Honor Code demanded truthfulness and honesty. It imposed a zero-tolerance policy against deception, or hiding behind comfort.

Following the Honor Code never bowed to comfortable timing or popularity. Honor and integrity are 24-hour values. That is why I refuse to lie about my identity.

I have personally served for a decade under Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell: an immoral law and policy that forces American soldiers to deceive and lie about their sexual orientation. Worse, it forces others to tolerate deception and lying. These values are completely opposed to anything I learned at West Point. Deception and lies poison a unit and cripple a fighting force.


Quote
When I was commissioned I was told that I serve at the pleasure of the President. I hope I have not displeased anyone by my honesty. I love my job. I want to deploy and continue to serve with the unit I respect and admire. I want to continue to serve our country because of everything it stands for.

Please do not wait to repeal Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. Please do not fire me.

Very Respectfully,

Daniel W. Choi
1LT, IN
New York Army National Guard

http://amfix.blogs.cnn.com/2009/05/11/gay-soldier-dont-fire-me/ (http://amfix.blogs.cnn.com/2009/05/11/gay-soldier-dont-fire-me/)

Lt. Choi will be a guest on CNN’s AC360 Tuesday night beginning at 10pm ET.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: jack on May 12, 2009, 04:17:34 PM
he may have to beat anderson off with a big stick.  >:D

i will, however, be watching.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on May 12, 2009, 04:40:40 PM
he may have to beat anderson off with a big stick.  >:D

i will, however, be watching.

I'd settle for a small stick.

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: lovelyamazing on May 18, 2009, 11:52:56 PM
Dan Choi's Kiss

http://www.queerty.com/watch-dan-choi-not-afraid-to-come-out-nor-make-out-on-camera-20090518/

Watch the video
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on May 19, 2009, 06:19:49 AM
Fantastic Maya! Thank you! As a former soldier myself (back in the 70's), I appreciate it.

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: lovelyamazing on May 19, 2009, 08:48:30 AM
Fantastic Maya! Thank you! As a former soldier myself (back in the 70's), I appreciate it.



(((((Fritz)))))
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: jack on May 19, 2009, 08:47:27 PM
(http://www.sldn.org/page/-/images/ChanLoweCoffinGraphic.jpg/@s_0.95)
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: jack on May 19, 2009, 09:03:19 PM
it just gets stupider and meaner, and OBAMA sits, waits, and does nothing.

Quote
Active-Duty Combat Aviator Booted from Military
Soon to Lose Career and Millions in Retirement under "Don't Ask, Don't Tell"

WASHINGTON, DC - The Servicemembers Legal Defense Network (SLDN) has learned that Lt. Col. Victor Fehrenbach was recently notified he will be separated from the US Air Force under "Don't Ask, Don't Tell."

Fehrenbach served in Afghanistan and Iraq. He flew the longest combat sorties in his squadron's history, destroying Taliban and Al Qaeda targets in support of Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom. And after the Sept. 11 attacks, Fehrenbach was hand-picked to protect the airspace over Washington, D.C. 

****

Lieutenant Colonel Fehrenbach's awards include the Meritorious Service Medal, nine Air Medals (including one for Heroism), the Aerial Achievement Medal, five Air Force Commendation Medals and the Navy Commendation Medal.

http://www.sldn.org/news/archives/active-duty-combat-aviator-booted-from-military/

lt colonel fehrenbach estimates that the us taxpayers have put in excess of 25 million dollars into his training... AND he was set to deploy back to afghanistan yet again last month, but his services are no longer needed. 
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: lovelyamazing on May 19, 2009, 09:12:45 PM
it just gets stupider and meaner, and OBAMA sits, waits, and does nothing.

http://thegayatheist.blogspot.com/2009/05/dadt-lt-colonel-fehrenbach.html

There's a video here.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: lovelyamazing on May 19, 2009, 09:17:07 PM
Witt Complicates Things for Obama, DADT
http://www.advocate.com/news_detail_ektid84716.asp


“The Bush administration probably would have argued it [in the Supreme Court] just because they hate us,” Bridget Wilson, an openly gay attorney in private practice, told The Advocate in March. “But it’s a new day in Washington. My sense is that they don’t want to appeal this because they don’t want to get into a battle over ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ right now.”

The Wall Street Journal reports that administration officials will continue to defend "don't ask, don't tell" when the trial begins in the lower court. It's not clear whether administration officials will heed the federal appeals court decision and argue that Witt is a specific threat to the Air Force because she's gay.

President Obama has made it clear he wants "don't ask, don't tell" repealed, but believes it should be accomplished legislatively. 


Accomplishing something legislatively in USA seems to take 10 times as long as it would in India :-\ Seriously what's the problem?
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: jack on May 19, 2009, 10:07:58 PM
i thought homosexuality was still against the law in india, and despite more public acceptance, your legislature is adamant that it remain so.  did that change lately?
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: lovelyamazing on May 19, 2009, 10:20:00 PM
i thought homosexuality was still against the law in india, and despite more public acceptance, your legislature is adamant that it remain so.  did that change lately?
We have had too much political instability and one coalition government after another. The fundamentalist parties have been thrown out in the recent election (sigh of relief). Hopefully the new government has sufficient majority to go ahead with progressive policies.
There's now a very huge movement against that law. As there is against many other human and social rights issues crying for attention in India. I don't think the public can be silenced any more. We are hopeful of a decision coming soon(by Indian standards) and a good one.

If USA speeds things up and takes firm decisions on these issues, we will have a democracy in the developed world to look to for inspiration. DADT is a policy that asks people to live a lie or be thrown out of service and that's sad.

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: lovelyamazing on May 19, 2009, 10:41:39 PM
Sorry for two consecutive posts. I am cross posting from Janjo's post in the gay marriage thread. I think it will make my point clearer about how the momentum on certain important issues should not be lost.

Mr Obama may or may not do what is expedient, politics always being a trade off between what you want to do and what you can get passed into law, or get away with, without losing support for other things that you need to do, but, in the words of Victor Hugo "There is nothing more powerful than an idea whose time has come." maybe full gay rights and responsibilities is one such idea.

I think that the rights of those who give their lives to protect the country come on top of the list. It's both their right and their responsiility to live the truth.

Quote
There is still a long fight ahead but it seems to me that the tide has turned, and gay civil rights may be an unstoppable force in this era.
Perhaps that is why so many religous conservatives are so worried, because eventually their power base will start to look more and more out of touch with main stream thought.

The timing is right, in fact overdue in America, whereas the momentum is just building in India.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: jack on May 20, 2009, 12:01:45 AM
overdue is right.  i have been having this discussion and fighting this fight since 1970.  i am about sick of it.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: lovelyamazing on May 20, 2009, 12:09:41 AM
overdue is right.  i have been having this discussion and fighting this fight since 1970.  i am about sick of it.

(((((Jack))))) we're in these fights together. I know it can really wear a person out. I'm in my own fight with our corrupt judicial system and I know what it's like.

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: lovelyamazing on May 21, 2009, 08:09:22 AM

Gays Have Served Honorably in the War on Terror
It's time to end 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell."
By BRIAN HUGHES


The White House now hedges on the issue, saying it supports changing the policy "in a sensible way."

What's clear to me, a gay man who served for four years in the military, including in Iraq and Afghanistan, is that the most sensible change would be a full repeal.


...

Several of my colleagues knew I was gay. We lived in the closest possible conditions. When there were showers, we showered together. When we were out overnight on the cold, bare mountains of Afghanistan, we slept huddled together for warmth. It should go without saying that there was nothing remotely sexual about these situations. We had uncomfortable experiences -- we were at war, after all -- but my buddies were never uncomfortable with me.
The reason I didn't come out to more of my comrades wasn't out of concern for morale. I was worried about losing my job.



This guy says it as it is.

Read the full thing here http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124286225508241195.html
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on May 21, 2009, 06:11:35 PM
It has always been supremely ironic that the main reason most opponents give to having gay people in the military is the physical closeness that people of different orientation would be obliged to share. Yet the opposition comes primarily from those who are not in such close contact with others, seen from the comfort of the living room/legislative assembly, not from fellow brothers/sisters in arms who are sharing the closeness.

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: lovelyamazing on May 21, 2009, 06:53:59 PM
It has always been supremely ironic that the main reason most opponents give to having gay people in the military is the physical closeness that people of different orientation would be obliged to share. Yet the opposition comes primarily from those who are not in such close contact with others, seen from the comfort of the living room/legislative assembly, not from fellow brothers/sisters in arms who are sharing the closeness.



Fritz I've seen in my own RL experience, a morbid fear that some people exhibit about human closeness. Every touch is looked upon with suspicion as "sexual." I have no idea what's to oppose about a gay man and a straight man huddled together with a sense of brotherhood and mutual support, providing comfort to each other in a situation where any moment could be the last. And who can judge this better than the men actually in those situations?  I'm reminded of the logic used decades ago that men and women should not be together in the workplace (yes it was about keeping women out of the workplace) because of the physical closeness they would be obliged to share. I guess this meant that they needed to fear one another as "predators?"  So years ago it was about viewing someone of another gender as a sexual threat and now it's the same logic about someone of another orientation.


Sorry, slightly incoherent, but passionate nonetheless. Just woke up :">
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: jack on May 21, 2009, 08:27:17 PM
watch ana marie cox (nee wonkette) crucify robert gibbs on his specious and dishonest answer  yesterday about the administration's committment to overturning DADT.

http://airamerica.com/blog/2009/may/21/ana-marie-cox-calls-out-gibbs-again-dont-ask-dont-tell-progress-video

i think you may want to send her cards and flowers for holding gibbs, and by extention obama feet to the fire over this. 

brilliant, absolutely brilliant.

i got the feeling gibbs rather admired her temerity and tenacity.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: lovelyamazing on May 21, 2009, 08:53:41 PM
watch ana marie cox (nee wonkette) crucify robert gibbs on his specious and dishonest answer  yesterday about the administration's committment to overturning DADT.


i got the feeling gibbs rather admired her temerity and tenacity.

Thanks Jack - I'll watch now.

http://www.advocate.com/news_detail_ektid85291.asp

Some extracts on that link.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on May 23, 2009, 01:17:25 PM
Okay, this news is a couple years old, but I had never heard it
before and it is so absurdly silly that I had to post it:

Quote
THE US Army planned to arm itself with "gay bombs" that would turn
enemies into uncontrollable homosexuals.  The Pentagon has confirmed its
military leaders had investigated the use of the non-lethal chemical weapon
designed to target human behavior.   Enemies would be left helpless by mass
gay orgies, as soldiers were irresistibly attracted to one another, weapons
researchers believed.

Documents released to Californian-based watchdog The Sunshine Project
show army researchers suggested the lust-spray could disrupt "discipline and
morale in enemy units".   "One distasteful but completely non-lethal example
would be strong aphrodisiacs, especially if the chemical also caused
homosexual behavior," the 1994 research proposal says.
 
The documents indicate the project titled "Harrassing, Annoying and 'Bad Guy'
Identifying Chemicals" would have cost many nillions of dollars.  Documents
released to The Sunshine Project under Freedom of Information laws also
show other weapons in the project would "attract annoying creatures to the
enemy position", specifically bees, including biting bugs, rodents and "larger
animals".

Sexual attractants would also be a key ingredient in the chemicals designed attract the bugs and pests.   The project also aimed to identify "bad guys" with
non-lethal chemical markers.   While rumors of a gay bomb have previously
been circulated, The Pentagon last week, admitted it had considered – but
rejected – the project proposed by the Wright Laboratory at an Ohio Air Force
base.

Previous unusual weapons believed to have been developed by the US military
include invisibility cloaks.  Edward Hammond of the Sunshine Project told CBS
he believed the military had given the gay-bomb plan strong consideration.
 
"The Ohio Air Force lab proposed that a bomb be developed that contained a
chemical that would cause enemy soldiers to become gay, and to have their
units break down because all their soldiers became irresistably attractive to
one another," Mr Hammond told CBS.

"The notion was that a chemical that would probably be pleasant in the human
body in low quantities could be identified, and by virtue of either breathing or
having their skin exposed to this chemical, the notion was that soliders would
become gay," he said.

Now that's a bomb I could go for!

Don't we already have this?  Isn't it called poppers?

I could see a gay serviceman under the DADT policy accidently
setting if off on our own troops!  LOL!

Reminds me, again, of the Lily Tomlin line:  "I worry that the person who
thought up Musak, might be thinking up something else!"

Title: Dan Choi in action - listen to his speech.
Post by: lovelyamazing on May 27, 2009, 09:56:28 PM
http://qik.com/unitethefight
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on May 28, 2009, 02:51:54 AM
I was at the Beverly Hilton protest tonight where a DNC
fundraiser was being held, Obama was speaking, and
Dan Choi spoke at the glbt rally across the street about DADT
and DOMA and other things.  The petition asking Obama to keep
Dan in his job was there in about ten boxes with over 130,000
names.  It was somehow hoped that it could be delivered to Obama.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: lovelyamazing on May 28, 2009, 03:03:04 AM
I was at the Beverly Hilton protest tonight where a DNC
fundraiser was being held, Obama was speaking, and
Dan Choi spoke at the glbt rally across the street about DADT
and DOMA and other things.  The petition asking Obama to keep
Dan in his job was there in about ten boxes with over 130,000
names.
  It was somehow hoped that it could be delivered to Obama.


Awesome! I do hope it can be delivered. Great that you were there in person.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: BayCityJohn on June 04, 2009, 06:49:43 PM
"DADT": Gay Activists in the Way?

Quote
gay rights leaders in Washington have made a deal with senators and members of the House to not push for an end to "don’t ask, don’t tell" until sometime next year.


http://www.advocate.com/news_detail_ektid88337.asp (http://www.advocate.com/news_detail_ektid88337.asp)
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Frandley on June 07, 2009, 11:13:27 PM
A Deal on Don't Ask, Don't Tell?
By: PAUL SCHINDLER
06/05/2009

A video report on The Daily Beast states that a deal has been struck in Washington to put off efforts to repeal the Don't Ask, Don't Tell military policy until at least next year in favor of action on long-stalled employment nondiscrimination and hate crimes measures -- and that report is drawing a harsh rebuke from the Human Rights Campaign, the nation's leading LGBT lobby on Capitol Hill.

 
"This story is not only an outright lie, it is recklessly irresponsible," wrote Trevor Thomas, a spokesman for the group, in an email message. "HRC never made such a deal and continues to work with Congress and the administration on a full range of equality issues including a swift end to the military's shameful ban on gay servicemembers."

The report, by Jason Bellini, maintains that New York's senior senator, Charles Schumer, "let slip to a handful of gay leaders that the HRC told him Don't Ask, Don't Tell isn't the White House's priority."

http://www.gaycitynews.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=20327059&BRD=2729&PAG=461&dept_id=568857&rfi=6


Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: BayCityJohn on June 08, 2009, 09:12:45 AM
Court rejects challenge to 'don't ask, don't tell'

The Supreme Court on Monday turned down a challenge to the Pentagon policy forbidding gays and lesbians from serving openly in the military, granting a request by the Obama administration.

The court said it will not hear an appeal from former Army Capt. James Pietrangelo II, who was dismissed under the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy.

The federal appeals court in Boston earlier threw out a lawsuit filed by Pietrangelo and 11 other veterans. He was the only member of that group who asked the high court to rule that the Clinton-era policy is unconstitutional.

In court papers, the administration said the appeals court ruled correctly in this case when it found that "don't ask, don't tell" is "rationally related to the government's legitimate interest in military discipline and cohesion."


http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090608/ap_on_go_su_co/us_supreme_court_gays_military (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090608/ap_on_go_su_co/us_supreme_court_gays_military)
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Frandley on June 16, 2009, 02:45:40 AM
With over 60% over the population against DADT, this should be an easy one for Obama.

Look at all that Bush pushed through on several issues with far less support.

Bill Maher might be right.  Obama, in this one sense, be more Bushian.

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on June 18, 2009, 05:26:01 PM
ASK NOT is a documentary airing over
the next couple weeks on PBS stations.

ASK NOT:  After years of war, the United States military is
desperate for new recruits--unless they happen to be openly gay.

A provocative portrait of bravery despite exclusion, ASK NOT
explores the history of the infamous "don't ask, don't tell" policy
and reveals the personal stories of gay Americans willing to risk
their lives for a country that criminalizes the act of coming out.


Info and such at:
http://www.pbs.org/independentlens/asknot/

Jarrod Chlapowski (with his boyfriend) is one of the participants.  On his
blog he says the documentary has been shown at some GLBT film festivals
and the PBS airing is somewhat shortened.  It's also available on dvd.

(http://www.pbs.org/independentlens/asknot/images/alex_jarrod.jpg) (http://www.pbs.org/independentlens/asknot/images/alex_jarrod2.jpg)
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on June 19, 2009, 06:14:02 PM
In an editorial in the Washington Post today, former Army General John M. Shalikashvili alludes to this documentary.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/18/AR2009061803497.html

Quote
The officers who oppose lifting the ban argued in The Post that there is "no compelling national security reason" to let openly gay troops serve. They also say, however, that "losses of even a few thousand sergeants, petty officers and experienced mid-grade officers" -- those they believe might bolt -- are unaffordable. Under current policy, we have lost more than 13,000 of those people, such as the Arabic language speaker featured in the new film "Ask Not." In addition, researchers at the University of California at Los Angeles have found that nearly 4,000 people leave voluntarily each year because of the ban, and that more than 40,000 recruits might join if the ban is ended.

President Obama has wisely indicated that he will consult carefully with military leadership before making any change to "don't ask, don't tell." In the same way that military leaders take into account research about what works and what doesn't when contemplating a new strategy or doctrine, it will be important for the conversation about gays and lesbians in the military to be informed by data, not speculation or emotion. That people on all sides of the issue feel strongly about it is more reason, not less, to let the evidence do the talking.

 
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on June 20, 2009, 04:31:53 PM
This Week
Transcript: National Security Adviser Gen. James Jones and
Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz.
Exclusive First Interview with President Barack Obama's
National Security Adviser


http://abcnews.go.com/ThisWeek/Story?id=7549797&page=1

Quote
STEPHANOPOULOS: Let me bring up the issue of gays in the military.
The president has said he wants to reform that policy, allow gays to serve
openly in the military and actually a remarkable letter from the president was
released this week to Lieutenant Sandy Tsao, who was a serviceperson
who was discharged from the military because she's a lesbian and there is
this handwritten note I want to show our viewers right now from the
president to Sandy in which he says, "Thanks for your wonderful and
thoughtful letter.

STEPHANOPOULOS: It is because of outstanding Americans like you that I
committed to changing our current policy. Although it will take some time to
complete, partly because it needs congressional action, I intend to fulfill my
commitment, Barack Obama."

Now, this is in the Congress right now. Will take legislation to completely
overturn but some of the president's supporters like Congressman Rush
Holt of New Jersey say that what the president can do right now is issue an
executive order to review the policy and order the military to stop
investigation and prosecutions while that review is going on, while the
Congress is considering this legislation. Will the president issue such an
order?

JONES: Well, that is, of course, up to the president. And this issue is
something that has been brought up during the campaign. We have had
preliminary discussions with the leadership of the Pentagon, Secretary
Gates, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs, this is, as you know, George, better
than most, this is an issue that is not going to be a light switch but more of a
rheostat in terms of discussing it and building - having the discussions that
have to be had with the military in order to make sure the good order and
discipline of the military ...

STEPHANOPOULOS: And I understand that and this is a complicated issue.

JONES: So it's a complicated issue. It will be teed up (ph) appropriately and
it will be discussed in the way the president does things, which is be very
deliberative, very thoughtful, seeking out all sides on the issue and trying to...

STEPHANOPOULOS: But if the president is against the policy, why not
suspend prosecutions and investigations while that review continues?

JONES: Well, maybe that's an option that eventually we'll get to but we're not
there now.

STEPHANOPOULOS: A lot of your former colleagues in the military, a
thousand flag and general officers including 50 four stars have written a
letter to the president opposing any change in the policy, saying that their
past experience as military leaders make them concerned about it. They
think it's going to have effect on morale, discipline, unit cohesion, what do
you say to your former colleagues?

JONES: Well, I think - as I said, this is illustrated by the fact that this is a very
sensitive issue and it has to be discussed over time and it has - all sides
have to be heard. But I think most of us who have served in the military
believe that the standards of conduct is what determines the good order
and discipline. So as long as conduct by all members of the military is not
detrimental to the good order and discipline, then you have cohesion in the
ranks.

But there is ...

STEPHANOPOULOS: But that gets to the heart of the problem. I mean, if
you're saying any kind of homosexual act is conduct ...

JONES: I'm saying that it applies - it has to be a uniform policy for all
members of the military in order to function as a military has to function. We
will have long discussions about this. It will be thoughtful. It will be
deliberative. The president I know will reach out to fully understand both
sides or all sides of the issue before he makes a decision.

STEPHANOPOULOS: But it will be overturned.

JONES: I don't know.  We'll have to - the president has said that he is in
favor of that. We'll just wait - we'll have to wait and see - as a result of the
deliberations and as a result of the - in the months and weeks ahead. We
have a lot on our plate right now. It has to be teed up at the right time so - to
do this the right way.


Quote
STEPHANOPOULOS: And let me bring in Senator John McCain.

STEPHANOPOULOS: How about this issue of "don't ask, don't tell"?

STEPHANOPOULOS: It's now been bedeviling the military for 15, 16 years
right now. Growing support to reform the policy. More than 100 members of
Congress say it should be reformed. Former chairman of the joint chiefs,
General Shalikashvili, have said it should be reformed. Where are you on
that today and how would you reform the policy if at all?

MCCAIN: Again, I've said for months, I will be glad to have a thorough review
of the policy by the Joint Chiefs of Staff and their recommendations. You
might recall it was General Powell who weighed in back early on in the
Clinton administration that said we need to have this policy and it's been
successful. We now have the best- trained, best-equipped, most
professional military in the history of this country in my view.

So I would rely on a study by the Joint Chiefs of Staff as how the impact of
changing this policy would have on our ability to carry out our military
missions and then I would make judgments from there.

But in all due respect, right now the military is functioning extremely well in
very difficult conditions. We have to have an assessment on recruitment, on
retention and all the other aspects of the impact on our military if we change
the policy.

In my view, and I know that a lot of people don't agree with that, the policy
has been working and I think it's been working well.

STEPHANOPOULOS: But let me ask you about your party. Not working ...

MCCAIN: Not working.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Not working as well. You've got this "Time Magazine"
cover this week saying, "Endangered Species, the Republicans". Is your
party an endangered species?

MCCAIN: I probably would not go that length. We all work in cycles for many
years. We have seen parties down and parties up. That's a great thing about
American politics. But having said that, do we have to do a better job of
getting our message out? Do we have to do a better job recruiting
candidates? Do we have to do a better job of outreach? Outreach to many
Americans that don't feel that they can be part of our party? Absolutely.
Absolutely.

[...]

STEPHANOPOULOS: Your former campaign manager Steve Schmidt came
out and said unless the party has a more live and let live philosophy on
issues like gay rights and gay marriage, your own daughter has taken the
same position, you're not going to be able to attract especially the young
generation.

MCCAIN: I think we have to be an inclusive party. That does not mean
betrayal of fundamental principles. One of the fundamental principles of the
Republican Party is to as much as possible, to let people lead their own
lives without government interference in their lives. To go as far as their
hopes and dreams and aspirations will take them.

We have to understand that there may be a candidate that can win in one
part of our country like the South, may not be able to get elected in
Pennsylvania. And local needs and local issues are important but
fundamental principles can be articulated. I believe America is a right of
center nation. I believe the Republican party is a right of center party. We
have to get in synch with the American people ...

STEPHANOPOULOS: Does that mean more toleration of those who believe
that women should have the right to an abortion? Of those who believe that
gays and lesbians should have full civil rights?

MCCAIN: It means that we can have people in our party who do not have the
same views on specific issues as long as we share common principles.

Now, I don't agree with my daughter on specific issues. I still love my
daughter and I respect her views and I think there is a place for her in the
Republican Party. I do. I think we've got to broaden our - enlarge our tent and
at the same time stick to our fundamental principles which are right of
center. And I don't - it's not that hard, I don't think, except that we've got to do
a better of job of saying, for example, Hispanic voters in my state and in the
Southwest are pro-life, small business, low taxes, patriotic, et cetera.

We should be able to get a lot more Hispanic participation in the
Republican Party.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Well, Senator, thank you very much. We'll see if it
happens in the future.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: jack on June 22, 2009, 03:01:57 PM
this is either promising or depressing, depending on how you look at it.

http://www.towleroad.com/2009/06/76-house-democrats-urges-obama-to-halt-gay-military-discharges.html

Quote
A letter organized by Florida Rep. Alcee Hastings went to the White House today urging Obama to halt military discharges of gay and lesbian servicemembers. The letter was signed by 76 House Democrats, the Boston Globe reports:

Hastings  "In the most vocal plea yet for the White House to take the lead in pushing for gays and lesbians to be allowed to serve openly in the military, 76 Democratic lawmakers today urged President Obama to use his executive powers to order a halt to military discharges under the controversial "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" law and work aggressively with Congress to pass new legislation

its progress, but considering the number of house reps, democrats in particular, the smell of chicken manure is sad.

here are the signers (and please give props to the lone republican)

The letter was authored by Hastings and signed by Representatives Barney Frank (D-MA), John Conyers, Jr. (D-MI), Fortney "Pete" Stark (D-CA), Edward J. Markey (D-MA), Gary Ackerman (D-NY), Louise Slaughter (D-NY), Eliot Engel (D-NY), Jim McDermott (D-WA), Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL), José Serrano (D-NY), James Moran (D-VA), Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-DC), Ed Pastor (D-AZ), James Clyburn (D-SC), Anna Eshoo (D-CA), Bob Filner (D-CA), Luis Gutierrez (D-IL), Eddie Bernice Johnson (D-TX), Carolyn Maloney (D-NY), Robert "Bobby" Scott (D-VA), Bennie Thompson (D-MS), Nydia Velázquez (D-NY), Melvin Watt (D-NC), Lynn Woolsey (D-CA), Lloyd Doggett (D-TX), Chaka Fattah (D-PA), Jane Harman (D-CA), Lois Capps (D-CA), Donna M. Christensen (D-VI), Diana DeGette (D-CO), Bill Delahunt (D-MA), Carolyn Cheeks Kilpatrick (D-MI), Dennis Kucinich (D-OH), Barbara Lee (D-CA), James McGovern (D-MA), Brad Sherman (D-CA), Robert Wexler (D-FL), Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), Shelley Berkley (D-NV), Michael Capuano (D-MA), Joseph Crowley (D-NY), Rush Holt (D-NJ), John Larson (D-CT), Grace Napolitano (D-CA), Jan Schakowsky (D-IL), Anthony Weiner (D-NY), David Wu (D-OR), William Lacy Clay (D-MO), Mike Honda (D-CA), James Langevin (D-RI), Betty McCollum (D-MN), Diane Watson (D-CA), Tim Bishop (D-NY), Raúl Grijalva (D-AZ), Linda Sánchez (D-CA), Emanuel Cleaver (D-MO), Doris Matsui (D-CA), Gwen Moore (D-WI), Debbie Wasserman Schulz (D-FL), André Carson (D-IN), Kathy Castor (D-FL), Yvette Clarke (D-NY), Donna F. Edwards (D-MD), Keith Ellison (D-MN), Marcia L. Fudge (D-OH), Phil Hare (D-IL), Mazie K. Hirono (D-HI), Laura Richardson (D-CA), Joe Sestak (D-PA), Niki Tsongas (D-MA), Peter Welch (D-VT), Alan Grayson (D-FL), Jared Polis (D-CO), Mike Quigley (D-IL), and Gregorio Sablan (D-MP).
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on June 23, 2009, 04:18:47 PM
I think it means this.  We have to do our part to pressure our
Representatives.  Even though 14 California Representatives
are on there as signers, mine is not!  Henry Waxman.  The
house representative of West Hollywood, California.  I will
be calling and emailing him to find out why not.  (I will also
be telling him that support also needs to be transferred into
action.  Words are no longer enough.)

www.house.gov/waxman

Put your own representatives last name after the slash /
and everyone whose representative's name is not on there
as a signer --  Email them and ask why not?  Especially if you
are represented by a Republican.  Well, not especially, but
since polls show a majority of conservatives even approve
lifting the gay ban, there is no reason Republicans should not
be sponsoring this.  Very easy and simple.  If I get a reply I will
post it.

Number of signers from each state:

Alabama   (0/7) (zero signers out of seven house members)
Alaska   (0/1)
Arizona   (2/10)
Arkansas   (0/4)
California   (14/53)
Colorado   (2/7)
Connecticut   (1/5)
Delaware   (0/1)
District of Columbia   (1/3)
Florida   (5/25)
Georgia   (0/13)
Hawaii   (1/2)
Idaho      (0/2)
Illinois   (4/19)
Indiana   (1/9)
Iowa      (0/5)
Kansas   (0/4)
Kentucky   (0/6)
Louisiana   (0/7)
Maine      (0/2)
Maryland   (1/8)
Massachusetts   (6/10)
Michigan   (2/15)
Minnesota   (2/8)
Mississippi   (1/4)
Missouri   (2/9)
Montana   (0/1)
MP (1)
Nebraska   (0/3)
Nevada   (1/3)
New Hampshire   (0/2)
New Jersey   (1/13)
New Mexico   (0/3)
New York   (11/29)
North Carolina   (1/13)
North Dakota   (0/1)
Ohio   (2/18)
Oklahoma   (0/5)
Oregon   (1/5)
Pennsylvania   (2/19)
Rhode Island   (1/2)
South Carolina   (1/6)
South Dakota   (0/1)
Tennessee      (0/9)
Texas         (2/32)
Utah         (0/3)
Vermont   (1/1)
Virgin Islands (1/?)
Virginia   (2/11)
Washington   (1/9)
West Virginia   (0/3)
Wisconsin   (2/8)
Wyoming   (0/1)
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: atruant on July 01, 2009, 05:57:07 PM
Hi Folks,

I'm not holding my breath that the next level of review will change the Syracuse board's decision...

http://www.syracuse.com/news/index.ssf/2009/06/military_board_recommends_disc.html
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on July 02, 2009, 01:19:59 PM

While Servicemembers Continue to be Discharged,
Gay Sailor Found Murdered on Military Base


http://www.veteranstoday.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=7730

Quote
Yesterday, the San Diego Union-Tribune reported that the body of openly gay
Seaman August Provost was discovered in a guard shack at Camp
Pendelton.   A “person of interest” in connection to the suspected homicide
is now being held in the Navy brig at Marine Corps Air Station Miramar.
According to Provost’s sister, he had recently complained to his family that
“someone was harassing and bothering him.”   She told him that he should
report it to his supervisor.  According to the Servicemembers Legal Defense
Network, Provost likely didn’t report the harassment because of “Don’t Ask,
Don’t Tell”:

The Navy would not comment on whether Provost’s orientation had anything
to do with the murder.

“While ‘Don’t ask, Don’t tell’ is in place, anybody in the military who is gay
has no place to go to get assistance or counseling,”
said Ben Gomez of Servicemembers Legal Defense Network, an advocacy group for gays in the military.

Now you have blood on your hands, Mr. President.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on July 07, 2009, 01:12:16 PM
Gays in the Military: Does a Sailor's Murder Signal Deeper Problems?
By Mark Thompson / Washington Tuesday, Jul. 07, 2009

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1908956,00.html

Quote
Even as Pentagon lawyers begin trying to ease the "Don't ask, don't tell"
prohibition on gays serving openly in the U.S. military, the murder last week of
an apparently gay sailor at California's Camp Pendleton has raised new
questions over the readiness of the armed forces to accept openly
homosexual personnel.

Seaman August Provost of Houston was shot and killed while standing
nighttime guard at his base on June 30. His body was found at about 3 a.m.
after his guard shack had been torched, apparently to destroy evidence
surrounding his slaying, according to Navy officials. Provost was gay,
according to his family, gay activists and his MySpace page, and had
reportedly "come out" to some of his Navy colleagues. Two California
Democratic members of Congress, Susan Davis and Bob Filner, have asked
the military to investigate whether Provost's sexual orientation was the reason
for his murder. Local gay activists have also asked for such a probe, and are
planning a candlelight vigil outside Camp Pendleton's gates this Friday.

The Navy has said there is no indication that the 28-year-old sailor was the
target of a hate crime, but officials also decline to specify a suspected motive.

I guess it's another DADT policy. Don't ask about what happened.  We won't tell.

I find it amusing that the man in question said he was gay on his myspace
page, but the author of this article still has to say that he was an apparently
gay sailor
.  If the man in question admits it himself, how much more truth
is there?

I also find the tone of some of these articles rather alarming--in the sense that
you get the feeling that the DADT policy in and of itself isn't what is harming or
causing (or at the very least a contributing factor) to the brutality shown by some
against the gay servicemembers, so that we should "go slow" in implementing
any change in the policy, as though that would help.

It's so damn frustrating.  I have contacted all three of my state politicians, both
Senators and my representative, asking them what they are personally doing
to help end this policy and have not heard a peep out of them so far.  I am
holding my representatives accountable when the next Federal elections come
around.  I want to know what they are doing or have done on these issues that
they've prommised to deal with in election after election.  I no longer am giving
them that free pass (vote) without something attached to it.  The time is now.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on July 08, 2009, 01:55:46 PM
The 'Queen for a Day' Rule

While reading some articles about DADT I came across this piece
of info that I had never heard about before, and which I find amusing:

Quote
Until 1981, it was the policy of all branches of the armed forces to retain, at their
discretion, anyone suspected of homosexual activity, thus promoting the
"queen for a day" rule, which allowed a person accused of homosexuality to
remain in the armed forces if one could successfully claim that their behavior
was only a singular occurrence.  This especially became the case during the
Vietnam War.

I cannot, as yet, find a source that indicates where this term originated.
It seems unlikely the U.S. Military came up with it.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: BayCityJohn on July 12, 2009, 10:57:08 AM
Allies' stance cited in US gays-in-military debate

When it comes to dealing with gay personnel in the ranks, the contrasts are stark among some of the world's proudest, toughest militaries — and these differing approaches are invoked by both sides as Americans renew debate over the Pentagon's "don't ask, don't tell" policy.

In the United States, more than 12,000 service members — including dozens of highly trained Arabic linguists — have been dismissed since 1994 because it became known they were gay. Current targets for discharge include a West Point graduate and Iraq war veteran, Army National Guard Lt. Dan Choi, and a veteran of combat missions over Iraq and Afghanistan, Air Force Lt. Col. Victor Fehrenbach.

In Britain, on the other hand, gay and lesbian service members marched in crisp uniforms in the annual Pride London parade July 4. Gay Australian soldiers and sailors had their own float in Sydney's Gay Mardi Gras parade. In Israel, the army magazine earlier this year featured two male soldiers on the cover, hugging one another.

America's "don't ask, don't tell" policy — which prohibits gays from serving openly in the armed forces — is the target of intensifying opposition, and President Barack Obama says he favors lifting the ban. But he wants to win over skeptics in Congress and the Pentagon, and a fierce debate lies ahead that will inevitably touch on the experiences of allied nations that have no bans.

-----------------------------------------------------------

Israel:

A nation in a constant state of combat readiness, Israel has had no restrictions on military service by gays since 1993 — a policy now considered thoroughly uncontroversial.

Gays were permitted to serve even before then, but not in certain intelligence positions where, at the time, they were deemed possible security risks vulnerable to blackmail. Now, gays and lesbians — among them several senior officers — serve in all branches of the military, including combat duty.

"In this regard, Israel has one of the most liberal armies in the world," said Yagil Levy, a sociologist from the Open University of Israel.

The army recognizes the partners of gay officers as their bereaved next-of-kin after their deaths, eligible for benefits. Gay officers at promotions and other ceremonies often have their partners by their sides.

Maj. Yoni Schoenfeld, a gay officer who is the editor of the military magazine, Bamahane, said there was very little friction in the ranks related to gay soldiers.

He served as a combat soldier and as commander of a paratrooper company, and said his sexual orientation — though known to fellow soldiers — was never an issue. Gay jokes would sometimes surface, unusually not malicious, he said, while receptiveness to gays in combat units could vary.

"If you're gay and live in the 'manly' world, there are no problems," he said. "Those who are more feminine in their speech and appearance have a harder time fitting in."

He sympathized with gays in the U.S. military who don't enjoy the same liberty he did.

"There shouldn't be a problem with it," he said. "It's the nature of man, and when you allow it to happen (serving openly), it's not a problem anymore."

Schoenfeld's magazine has reflected the evolving attitudes. In 2001, it was shut down briefly after featuring an interview with a retired colonel who had come out of the closet. Yet this year, there was no adverse reaction to the cover picture of two male soldiers embracing.

A gay magazine, meanwhile, named a major as its "man of a year" a few years ago; he continues to serve without harm to his career.

The military also provided the backdrop for Israel's precursor to "Brokeback Mountain" — the 2002 movie "Yossi & Jagger" about two Israeli combat soldiers who fall in love on the front lines. It was a hit with critics and the public, and was even screened on military bases.


http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5h5SbZGY0pOibnsY-il5OcczDgR3gD99D12500 (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5h5SbZGY0pOibnsY-il5OcczDgR3gD99D12500)
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on July 24, 2009, 04:09:21 PM
This was originally broadcast last fall, I believe, in several
parts on PBS; a program called CARRIER.  It's all about life
on a navy carrier and each segment portrays some aspect
of that.  I didn't see it before and I happened to come across
one of the segments that aired today exactly when a young
sailor was talking about being gay and having to hide that
fact on board the aircraft carrier.  What I saw was brief and
I don't know if this topic was covered anywhere else in the
program, or if they follow particular people throughout the
series, like Ken Burns does, but I admit I had thought about
watching this series when it was first on to see if they would
talk about gay issues at all.  I decided probably not and didn't
watch it, but I see I was wrong.  Has anyone else seen the
series and have any other info?  I didn't think they'd cover the
topic, since if you are telling, you're probably gonna get booted
out.  The ONLY good thing about DADT is if you really want to
get out of the service, that's an easy way to do it!  I wonder if
any straight people have ever done it just to get out?
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on July 24, 2009, 04:39:33 PM
After a little research:
Apparently this series was on a lot longer ago than I remember, April 2008!
And it’s ten hours.  Towleroad had an article about the sailor I mentioned above.

Carrier: An Interview with Quartermaster Brian Downey

http://www.towleroad.com/2008/04/carrier-an-inte.html

Quote
On Friday, I posted an interview with Jeff Dupre, a producer on the PBS special documentary mini-series Carrier. Carrier is a character-driven total immersion in the high-stakes world of an air craft carrier. A team of 17 filmmakers spent 6 months on the USS Nimitz on a full deployment to the Persian Gulf.

One of the hours tonight is called "Super Secrets" and details some of the more hush-hush goings-on aboard the Nimitz, including several interviews with gay and lesbian servicemembers. While those who are currently serving are pixellated in their interviews, one soldier you'll be able to see quite clearly is Brian Downey, who served as a quartermaster third class petty officer in the navigation department of the Nimitz.

Downey served four years in the Navy and is currently living in San Diego, working at a bar, and enrolling in school to be a medical assistant. Downey grew up on a Navajo reservation in the four corners area where Arizona, New Mexico, Utah, and Colorado come together.

I had the opportunity to ask Downey a few questions about his service and life aboard the Nimitz.

If you click the link you will get answers to these questions:

Did you anticipate any particular challenges coming aboard the Nimitz as a gay man?
Why did you decide to enlist in the Navy?
What were your duties aboard the ship and did you know what you wanted to do before you enlisted?
Would you do it again?
How was it serving under 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell'?
Did anybody who found out about your sexuality give you a hard time?
Did you feel like there was homophobia aboard the ship and how did you deal with it?


Quote
How do you feel about the 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' policy in general?

In this day and age and the way things are changing, if they drop it I don't see that it would be a big deal for anybody. People know each other on the ship. And that's just in the little community itself. If they were to drop the policy I'm sure it wouldn't cause much of a security risk for anybody. It's always been around — there have always been people in the military that have served that are gay. And people that have been in great positions — people that are in very high positions — and if it were dropped I'm sure it wouldn't be a big deal. We're not here to freak you out, we're here to try to do something with you - we need to do our job and do it well. We just happen to be a little different — just like blacks were different, just like women were different. Well before those times there were gays in the military. I think it would be a very big social uplifting, an awakening for people.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on July 24, 2009, 04:40:32 PM
There’s also a short interview with the producer, a friend of Andy Towle:

Quote
Were there many gays and lesbians on the Nimitz?

On the way to the Gulf, we stopped in Hong Kong. I went to a gay bar there and it was like, 'Hello, shipmates!' The place was packed with sailors. So yeah, from what I observed, there were quite a few. It's kind of an open secret. It's totally apparent, but everyone pretends not to notice. Many of the gay and lesbian sailors and marines I met were out to their friends and co-workers on the ship and it seemed to not be a big deal. But they always have that threat hanging over their heads.

More here:
http://www.towleroad.com/2008/04/carrier-intervi.html

There's also some interesting comments from gay guys who served
in the military at the end of the Downey interview.  (Previous post.)
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on July 27, 2009, 03:24:44 PM
Gay rights groups take aim at 'don't ask, don't tell'
Monday, 27 July 2009

Quote
PHILADELPHIA (CBS/AP) - Gay rights groups are starting a campaign
to change the military's "don't ask don't tell" policy about homosexuals in
uniform.

The first veteran of the Iraq war to serve in Congress will be at the Liberty Bell
in Philadelphia today along with gay rights organizations the Human Rights
Campaign and Servicemembers United.

Cong. Patrick Murphy (D-Penn.) served with the 82nd Airborne Division.

It's the first stop on a national tour to win repeal of the military's "don't ask,
don't tell" policy. 

Murphy says it's insulting to America's armed forces to contend they'd suffer
morale and recruiting problems if the U.S. had a serve-openly policy like in
Britain's military.

http://www.wbbm780.com/Gay-rights-groups-take-aim-at--don-t-ask--don-t-te/4880083

Title: Pentagon's Top Journal Calls for Repeal of Military Gay Ban
Post by: Jer009 on September 30, 2009, 08:55:11 AM
(snip)
Colonel Om Prakash, who now works in the office of Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates, writes in a new article in the Pentagon's top scholarly journal: "After a careful examination, there is no scientific evidence to support the claim that unit cohesion will be negatively affected if homosexuals serve openly. Based on this research, it is not time for the administration to reexamine the issue; rather it is time for the administration to examine how to implement the repeal of the ban."

http://www.towleroad.com/2009/09/pentagons-top-journal-calls-for-repeal-of-military-gay-ban.html
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on September 30, 2009, 04:55:53 PM
Though those who oppose gay people in the military don't need no steenkin' scientific evidence to know that they're right!  :D

Title: Bill Maher: New Rule: Everyone Deserves Equal Rights
Post by: Jer009 on October 10, 2009, 03:25:05 PM
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/09/bill-maher-repeal-dont-as_n_316189.html
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: estefue on October 14, 2009, 04:02:51 PM
It looks like things may be heating up on this.  I heard on the radio that Lieberman may be a point person in the senate and there is one "Blue Dog" house member strongly advocating against DADT.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Jer009 on October 15, 2009, 09:07:56 AM
I'm glad someone is advocating for the end of DADT, but seriously, Lieberman? Senator Palpatine? I wish it were anyone else.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: BayCityJohn on January 27, 2010, 06:20:46 PM
Washington (CNN) -- President Obama will ask Congress Wednesday night to repeal the military's "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy that bars gays and lesbians from openly serving, White House Senior Adviser David Axelrod told CNN.

The request will be included in the president's State of the Union address, Axelrod said.

http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/01/27/obama.gays.military/?hpt=T1 (http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/01/27/obama.gays.military/?hpt=T1)
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: BayCityJohn on January 27, 2010, 09:29:37 PM
HRC Announces Comprehensive Campaign to End “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”

January 27, 2010 10:19PM
Michael Cole

In response to the President’s pledge in this evening’s State of the Union address to work with Congress and the military towards repeal of the failed “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” law, the Human Rights Campaign announced an expanded “Voices of Honor” campaign that will organize veterans across the country, generate media coverage and build focused campaigns in key states that will be critical to the final votes in the House and Senate.

The campaign will expand on HRC’s field and legislative efforts through: an on-the-ground campaign manager in key states to build diverse local coalitions; public education through innovative media campaigns; activating grassroots contacts with Members of Congress; an online hub for action on repeal; and partnering with other key groups working on repeal including Center for American Progress, Servicemembers United and Servicemembers Legal Defense Network.

As part of this effort, tonight we launched a nationwide action alert to encourage Members of Congress to cosponsor the Military Readiness Enhancement Act.  TAKE ACTION NOW (https://secure3.convio.net/hrc/site/Advocacy?cmd=display&page=UserAction&id=673)!

Said HRC President Joe Solmonese:

    “The Commander in Chief sent a clear message tonight that in a time of war, what matters is that our men and women get the job done – not whether they’re gay or straight. Our ‘Voices of Honor’ campaign will bring about much needed action to end this law that the vast majority of Americans oppose. Our country simply cannot afford this discriminatory law that hurts military readiness by denying patriotic men and women the opportunity to serve. Ridding our laws of discrimination that weakens our national security will require continued leadership from the President as well as Congressional allies.”

http://tinyurl.com/yjfjqrm (http://tinyurl.com/yjfjqrm)
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on January 28, 2010, 07:11:24 PM
An ironic fact about gay people in the military is that, in the past, during times of war, gay people who have wanted to serve have been tolerated or even welcomed, even in the most cramped and intimate quarters, with little complaint. It is only in the luxury of peacetime that gay people have been drummed out of the services for what people perceive might have or could have happened during those times of close combat.

Title: Photo: Joint Chiefs Emotionless Over 'Don't Ask Don't Tell' Repeal
Post by: Jer009 on January 29, 2010, 09:40:11 AM
(snip)
Joe Jervis makes note of the enthusiastic reaction of the Joint Chiefs when Obama mentioned destroying  Iran's nuclear program (below) as opposed to their reaction when the repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" was brought up (above).

He also notes that the thought of gay soldiers serving openly in the military got Family Research Council's Tony Perkins thinkin' about gay sex again.

http://www.towleroad.com/2010/01/photo-joint-chiefs-emotionless-over-dont-ask-dont-tell-repeal.html
Title: Defense Dept: 'Several Year Process' to Repeal 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell'
Post by: Jer009 on January 30, 2010, 02:56:07 PM
(snip)
Say what?

A new AP article on the 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' repeal suggests it won't be complete until at least 2012:

http://www.towleroad.com/2010/01/defense-dept-several-year-process-to-repeal-dont-ask-dont-tell.html
Title: Re: Defense Dept: 'Several Year Process' to Repeal 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell'
Post by: tfferg on January 31, 2010, 06:49:44 PM
(snip)
Say what?

A new AP article on the 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' repeal suggests it won't be complete until at least 2012:

http://www.towleroad.com/2010/01/defense-dept-several-year-process-to-repeal-dont-ask-dont-tell.html
The prolonged review is surely just stalling. I haven't come across anything suggesting the points to be covered were issues in countries like Australia and the UK though in Australia there was a gap  until lesbian and gay members' partners were eligible for benfits in the same way as heterosexual partners.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: BayCityJohn on January 31, 2010, 07:59:29 PM
Obama will soon learn who is really in control of the military.

He will do as he is told just like Clinton did.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on January 31, 2010, 08:02:57 PM
Where is Harry Truman now that we need him?

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: BayCityJohn on January 31, 2010, 08:07:33 PM
Harry Truman is buried at his presidential library and museum in Independence, Missouri.

http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=gr&GRid=1043 (http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=gr&GRid=1043)
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Jer009 on February 01, 2010, 08:43:43 AM
 :)
Title: Defense Dept. to Halt Some Discharges During DADT Debate?
Post by: Jer009 on February 01, 2010, 08:46:19 AM
UPDATED

Interesting NYT article this morning on the forces — "a new generation in the military, a change in climate at the top levels of the Pentagon, pressure on the president from a critical interest group, even Senator Kirsten E. Gillibrand’s anticipated Democratic primary battle in New York" — that have compelled the 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' debate to finally begin. Also the timeline up till now.

http://www.towleroad.com/2010/02/defense-dept-to-halt-some-discharges-during-dadt-debate.html
Title: Joint Chiefs to Announce End to Discharges of Soldiers Who are Outed
Post by: Jer009 on February 02, 2010, 07:39:01 AM
(snips)
Sen. Carl Levin (D-MI) penned an op-ed in Politico. Here's part of it:

    An army is not a democracy. It is a meritocracy, where advancement depends not on who you are, but on how well you do your job. The meritocratic nature of our military has made it a leader in civil rights. It can be again on this issue.

So, ENDA gone. DOMA repeal nowhere in sight... What are gays getting in 2010? Looks like nothing. Or wait, maybe a few crumbs.

It'll be interesting see if HRC puts out a press release following this announcement that praises the administration, or condemns it. Bets?
Title: Watch: Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand Discusses 'DADT' on Rachel Maddow
Post by: Jer009 on February 02, 2010, 07:43:37 AM
(snip)

Senator Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) appeared on Rachel Maddow's show last night to discuss what we might hear in the 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' hearings, the possibility of a stop-loss order, and expectations about the timeline of the repeal.

http://www.towleroad.com/2010/02/watch-sen-kirsten-gillibrand-discusses-dadt-on-rachel-maddow.html
Title: Watch: Richard Socarides Discusses 'DADT' Repeal on BBC
Post by: Jer009 on February 02, 2010, 10:25:37 AM
http://www.towleroad.com/2010/02/watch-richard-socarides-discusses-dadt-repeal-on-bbc.html#more
Title: DADT: The Beginning of the End?
Post by: Jer009 on February 02, 2010, 12:40:02 PM
Department of Defense secretary Robert Gates and Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, will announce during a Tuesday hearing in front of the Senate Armed Services Committee steps they intend to take toward altering the way “don’t ask, don’t tell” regulations are enforced.


http://www.advocate.com/News/Daily_News/2010/02/01/Dont_Ask_Dont_Tell_The_Begininng_of_the_End/
Title: Top Military Officials Initiate Process Toward Repeal of Gay Ban
Post by: Jer009 on February 02, 2010, 12:56:58 PM
(snip)

Gates also announced that, within 45 days, he would recommend changes, within existing law, “to enforce policy in a more fair manner.” He believes that there is a “degree of latitude” within existing law, similar to what was widely reported today, to reduce instances where a service member is outed by a third party with the intent to harm his or her career. He cautioned that “It’s a little more complicated than Wapo conveyed,” however, and he would not state support (or opposition) to a moratorium on discharges of gay and lesbian service members during the year-long assessment.

http://www.towleroad.com/2010/02/top-military-officials-initiate-process-toward-repeal-of-gay-ban.html
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: BayCityJohn on February 02, 2010, 03:39:33 PM
Chairman Mullen Tweets for DADT Repeal

Stand by what I said: Allowing homosexuals to serve openly is the right thing to do. Comes down to integrity.

Name: Adm. Mike Mullen
Location: The Pentagon, Washington D.C.
Web: http://www.jcs.mil
Bio: Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff - CJCS, Senior Military Advisor, U.S. Navy Officer, Vietnam Veteran, Los Angeles native

http://twitter.com/thejointstaff (http://twitter.com/thejointstaff)
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on February 02, 2010, 05:46:35 PM
It was fascinating to hear how a few senators accused the Chairman of using his "power" to sell a repeal of the policy to them. I doubt they would have been so accusatory if he had been in agreement with them.

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: BayCityJohn on February 02, 2010, 06:17:54 PM
I've always thought that was the whole idea of having political power. Would they prefer the chairman to use his charm to persuade them instead?

They're just jealous that he has more power than they do.

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on February 03, 2010, 01:27:16 PM
From:
http://www.leonardmatlovich.com/

That site is highly skeptical of anything purportedly in the
works regarding DADT, and rightly so IMO.  Amid reports of
Colin Powell in favor of repealing DADT, these words of caution:

Quote
If you look at what Colin Powell actually said regarding DADT, he
did not state that he was in favor of repealing it, what he said was
that he supports Gates' new approach to the matter.

Well, despite Gates and Mullen's "personal" opposition to DADT, that
"new" approach is nothing but the "old approach" of "delay through 'study'."

That "approach" centers around that fact that gays will continue to be
discharged today, tomorrow, next week, next month, and for a MINIMUM of
the next year, some say two, and possibly longer.

For a careful reading of Gates' statement shows it loaded with lots of
so-called "issues" that he absurdly insists need to be studied YET AGAIN
which COULD result in a report.....just like that from the six-month "working
group" that Clinton tasked with coming up with an "implementation
plan"...which claims they can't OFFICIALLY say, "end DADT." See Mullen's
blog post today in which he's curiously chosen to rewrap his anti DADT
statement yesterday in a thick layer of Gates' excuses.

Gates consciously resurrected questions that the Rand study, ordered by
the Pentagon, put to rest in 1993. He repeatedly worked the "engaged in
two wars" excuse, hinted ominously about potential damage to "military
famiies" [read STRAIGHT military families], imagined totally unnecessary
changes to the UCMJ, absurdly, AS IF the military is a democracy, called
for a poll of troops to ask what THEY want [Nunn played that angle like a
pipe organ virtuoso to turn the ban into DADT], and inexplicably invited
members of Congress to contribute to what is supposed to be a DOD
report TO Congress.

Title: Fisking Bill Kristol
Post by: Jer009 on February 03, 2010, 04:12:30 PM
(snip)

    But with all due respect to his sincerely held if abstractly formed views on this subject, it would be reckless to require the military to carry out a major sociological change, one contrary to the preferences of a large majority of its members, as it fights two wars.

"Abstract" is of course a way to dismiss the bookish Mr Obama, as opposed to Mr Kristol, a decorated Afghanistan veteran and noted military tactician the editor of an opinion magazine. Major sociological change? Isn't that what men complained about when women started wearing trousers? Gays already serve in the military, so clearly they are capable of controlling their animal-like desire for the same sex. (Indeed, if only all soldiers could so capably reign in their sexual needs.) As for "the preferences of a large majority" of the military, according to the latest poll I could find, in 2006, 26% of military members agreed with allowing gays and lesbians to serve openly in the military, 32% were neutral and 37% disagreed.


http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2010/02/gays_military_1
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Sandy on February 04, 2010, 08:23:28 AM
He probably intended "societal" but didn't bother to edit his own work. Probably stuck with "sociological" because it sounds more authoritative, e.g., there are "statistics" and "experts" out there. As with many folks with few substantive arguments on their side, he is more concerned with appearance than with content, more concerned with distraction than directly addressing the issue.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: BayCityJohn on February 04, 2010, 11:51:54 AM
My secret life under 'don't ask, don't tell'

Editor's note: Retired Navy Capt. Joan E. Darrah served 29½ years as a naval intelligence officer and was chief of staff and deputy commander at the Office of Naval Intelligence. She has received several awards: three Legion of Merits, three Meritorious Service Medals, three Navy Commendation Medals and the Navy Achievement Medal. Darrah lives with her partner of 19 years, Lynne Kennedy, in Alexandria, Virginia.


(CNN) -- When I first joined the Navy, I had no idea that I was gay. I was well into my career when I realized this fact, but I was doing well as evidenced by the awards and promotions I was receiving.

In addition, I really enjoyed what I was doing and felt I was making a difference. So I opted to continue to serve, even though I knew that I would have to hide my true identity.

For most of my career in the Navy, I lived two lives and went to work each day wondering if that would be my last. Whenever the admiral would call me to his office, 99.9 percent of me was certain that it was to discuss an operational issue. But there was always that fear in the back of my mind that somehow I had been "outed," and he was calling me to his office to tell me that I was fired. So many simple things that straight people take for granted could have ended my career, even a comment such as "My partner and I went to the movies last night."

Do you think "don't ask, don't tell" should be reversed?

In spite of the stress of living under "don't ask, don't tell" and the constant fear of losing my job, somehow my partner, Lynne Kennedy, an openly gay reference librarian at the Library of Congress, and I had learned to deal with the policy and make the requisite sacrifices.

I had pretended to be straight and played the games most gays in the military are all too familiar with -- not daring to have a picture of Lynne on my desk, being reluctant to go out to dinner with her, telling her not to call me at work except in a real emergency, not going to church together, avoiding shopping for groceries together and generally staying out of sight of anyone I knew when we were together. I didn't want to have to lie about who Lynne was or have someone conclude that we were more than casual friends.

But it was the events of September 11, 2001, that caused me to appreciate fully the true impact of "don't ask, don't tell" on our lives.

At 8:30 a.m. on September 11, I went to a meeting in the Pentagon. At 9:30 a.m. I left that meeting. At 9:37 a.m., American Airlines Flight No. 77 slammed into the Pentagon and destroyed the exact space I had left less than eight minutes earlier, killing seven of my colleagues.

In the days and weeks that followed, I went to several funerals and memorial services for shipmates who had been killed. Most of my co-workers attended these services with their spouses whose support was critical at this difficult time, yet I was forced to go alone.

As the numbness began to wear off, it hit me how incredibly alone Lynne would have been had I been killed. The military is known for how it pulls together and helps people; we talk of the "military family," which is a way of saying we always look after each other, especially in times of need. But none of that support would have been available for Lynne, because under "don't ask, don't tell," she couldn't exist.

In fact, Lynne would have been one of the last people to know had I been killed, because nowhere in my paperwork or emergency contact information had I dared to list her name.




more...

http://tinyurl.com/y86m4ze (http://tinyurl.com/y86m4ze)
Title: Smoke the Bigots Out of the Closet
Post by: Jer009 on February 08, 2010, 09:21:01 AM
(snip)

It’s in this political context that we can see that there may have been some method to Obama’s troublesome tardiness on gay issues after all. But as we learned about this White House and the Democratic Congress in the health care debacle, they are perfectly capable of dropping the ball at any moment. Let’s hope they don’t this time. Should they actually press forward on “don’t ask” in an election year with Mullen and Gates on board — and with even McCain’s buddy, Joe Lieberman, calling for action “as soon as possible” — they could further the goal and raise the political price for those who stand in the way. Recalcitrant Congressional Republicans will have to explain why their perennial knee-jerk deference to “whatever the commanders want” extends to Gen. David Petraeus and Gen. Stanley McChrystal on troop surges but not to Mullen, who outranks them, on civil rights.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/07/opinion/07rich.html?th&emc=th
Title: 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' Activist Lt. Dan Choi Back in Active Service
Post by: Jer009 on February 09, 2010, 08:51:00 AM
(snip)

Lieutenant Dan Choi, a prominent face of the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" debate since he was threatened with discharge and announced the formation of Knights Out in early 2009, is back in active service, Jeff Sheng at Bilerico Project reports:

http://www.towleroad.com/2010/02/dont-ask-dont-tell-activist-lt-dan-choi-back-in-active-service.html
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: BayCityJohn on February 09, 2010, 10:24:32 PM
Gays in the military, onstage

Quote
The timing for Yank!—a musical about two World War II servicemen who fall in love, becoming part of a thriving underground gay-military scene—could not be more perfect. But despite the show’s obvious parallels to the latest “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” debate, its creators stress that Yank!, which begins an Off Broadway run this week, is not political.

“If there is any political aspect to it, it’s that it says gays have served in the military throughout history and gays will continue to serve, and that gay love and gay lives matter and should not be forgotten or swept under the carpet,” says book and lyrics writer David Zellnik, who created Yank! with his brother, composer Joe Zellnik.

The show, which premiered at the New York Musical Theatre Festival in 2005 before having short runs in Brooklyn (at the Gallery Players) and then in San Diego, is back with what the writers say is their “dream team,” including original director Igor Goldin and Ragtime star Bobby Steggert as Stu, the part he played when Yank! was in Brooklyn. The latest production also includes new staging, one new song and a dream ballet, “because what’s a ’40s musical without a dream ballet?” asks David, laughing along with Joe as the two animatedly share tales of both Yank! and the Zellnik-brother partnership over coffee near Union Square on a recent afternoon.

Just two years apart—David is 38 and Joe is 40—the New York–born Zellniks have always been close (including with their third sibling, Miriam, with whom Joe has cowritten mystery novels). Having grown up in a South Jersey household with their amateur-musician father’s four pianos and various other instruments, they have always been musical, as well. “Our mother was very artsy and pushed us into being theatrical,” Joe notes. “She was probably the only Jewish mother who would have been very disappointed if we turned out to be doctors and lawyers.”

The boys—who adored performing pieces out of their Cole Porter and Rodgers and Hammerstein songbooks—wrote their first song together when they were just 11 and 13; they cowrote their first show in high school.

And yes—they’re both gay.

Quote
Now, as the Zellniks gear up for the show’s Off Broadway debut, they are bursting at the idea of such a love story reaching its widest audience yet. “I think Brokeback Mountain was a great breakthrough for gay romance, because the gay cowboy movie was just a joke beforehand,” Joe says. “I don’t want to say this is our version of it, but people do watch it and say, ‘Oh! I get it!’ You just tell a story and suck the audience in, and then they treat it as a romance. They want to see whether these two people end up together. And the fact that it’s two men? Well, it’s just the obstacle of their circumstance.”

Read more: http://newyork.timeout.com/articles/gay/82658/yank-david-and-joe-zellnik-interview#ixzz0f6jNTxki
 (http://newyork.timeout.com/articles/gay/82658/yank-david-and-joe-zellnik-interview#ixzz0f6jNTxki)
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Jer009 on February 09, 2010, 11:47:58 PM
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Wow, John, that sounds like a really good show. I wish I could go to this show! If we're lucky, it will be made into a movie someday, or maybe a version will go on tour.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: tfferg on February 10, 2010, 02:06:08 AM

From Australia

Our Gay Soldiers Are Just Fine
By Adrian Phoon
 
(snip)
Perhaps the strongest arguments in favour of removing the ban, though, come from outside the US. In 2010, open homosexuality is a non-issue in several militaries around the world, including those of American allies such as Australia, Britain, Canada and Israel. All have managed to function without reporting any of the problems anticipated by the likes of McCain and North.

The Australian Defence Force would seem a model employer of gay, lesbian and bisexual personnel. In 1992, a year before the US implemented Don't Ask, Don't Tell, the Australian Defence Force lifted its ban on homosexuality. Stuart O'Brien, Chief Petty Officer and head of the Defence Gay and Lesbian Information Service, says that "the general experience of gay and lesbian personnel serving in the Australian Defence Force is one free from discrimination or harassment". Instances of discrimination are isolated and subject to due process. "When harassment does happen," O'Brien told me, "the Defence Force quickly addresses these issues to ensure harassment of any kind is stamped out."

O'Brien acknowledges the Federal Government's action in 2005 of extending Defence benefit payments to interdependent same-sex couples. He enthuses in particular about benefits pertaining to "defence housing assistance, removals on postings, leave travel and location allowances when posted to remote localities, reunion travel when separated and education assistance for dependent children." He also credits the Government's introduction of 85 same-sex law reforms in 2008 for removing discrimination relating to military superannuation and death benefits.

Corey Irlam, media spokesperson for the Australian Coalition for Equality, observes that ... Far from enabling the social dissolution predicted by American homophobes, the Defence Force's open homosexuality policy appears to have facilitated gay personnel's integration into military ranks. Stuart O'Brien's flourishing career would seem to vindicate this point. "I have seen operational service in the Middle East, been awarded numerous times and been promoted in minimal time," says O'Brien...
 

Full article http://newmatilda.com/2010/02/09/goodbye-discriminatory-costly-and-unnec (http://newmatilda.com/2010/02/09/goodbye-discriminatory-costly-and-unnec)
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on February 10, 2010, 06:42:38 AM
Gays in the military, onstage

Read more: http://newyork.timeout.com/articles/gay/82658/yank-david-and-joe-zellnik-interview#ixzz0f6jNTxki
 (http://newyork.timeout.com/articles/gay/82658/yank-david-and-joe-zellnik-interview#ixzz0f6jNTxki)

The topic of a gay subculture within the military is also covered by Conduct Unbecoming by Randy Shilts. The persecution of gay soldiers who are otherwise performing their duty as expected is a luxury that prior to DADT was unaffordable during wartime. Might be an indication that the current political military leadership since 9/11 doesn't really believe that we're in a true war.

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on February 10, 2010, 01:57:24 PM
A friend of mine, who visits all sorts of websites about Broadway
shows and such, and because of this knows how to find people
who have snuck in recording devices and record otherwise off
limits productions on stage (and, yes, it's a crapshoot quality
wise)  told me recently that he has a copy of this show YANK!

He mentioned it because I was talking about the show we saw
last year called THE ANDREWS BROTHERS, a WWII themed
musical where a small Pacific Island was gearing up for a USO
show starring the Andrews Sisters, but it turns out they can't come
there and, so not to disappoint the troops, the guys dress up as
them, hence The Andrews Brothers, and perform the show.  Although
not a gay romance, it is high camp.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Andrews_Brothers

http://www.yankthemusical.com/home.html

If I get to see the Yank dvd I will let you know my opinion.
Title: DADT: "Homosexual" Vs. "Gay"
Post by: Jer009 on February 12, 2010, 12:11:31 AM
(snip)

A fascinating CBS poll reveals that support for the repeal of DADT varies greatly depending on whether "homosexual" or "gay" is used in the wording of the question.

http://joemygod.blogspot.com/2010/02/dadt-homosexual-vs-gay.html

My personal feeling is that the term "homosexual", while accurate, has a cold, clinical feel. A poster put it well:

(snips)
This as nothing to do with "PC buillshit" but with the attitudes of ordinary Americans. The radical right has been working hard to make the word "homosexual" into a bad word, one that represents sick, disgusting, diseased perverts. The poll results suggest that the radical right has succeeded. If you're unhappy about that, perhaps you could get them to stop using the word on only a nasty, negative way. 

The radical right has framed our issues and they win more often than not. This poll shows that if we control the framing, we win support. That's not "PR" and it's not "PC buillshit" but a simple guide for survival.



Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: CellarDweller115 on February 12, 2010, 09:12:07 AM
Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell must go now

February 11, 2010 by Matthew Jarzen



In his State of the Union speech, President Barack Obama declared boldly in front of the assembled houses of Congress, and more particularly to his Joint Chiefs of Staff, that he would end the highly controversial Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy, which essentially bans gays from serving openly in the military.

The following day, Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Admiral Mike Mullen testified before the Senate Armed Services committee about the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy and both expressed support for the repeal of the policy.

Gates and Mullen also said they would be conducting a year-long study to see how to prepare the military for the repeal of the policy.


http://unlvrebelyell.com/2010/02/11/don%E2%80%99t-ask-don%E2%80%99t-tell-must-go-now/
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: CellarDweller115 on February 12, 2010, 09:13:55 AM
Military needs are all that count in 'don't ask' review

By Kathleen Parker - The Washington Post - February 12, 2010 12:00 AM

Repealing "don't ask, don't tell" may be the right thing to do, but there's only one reason to do it: military effectiveness.

Yet we hear the argument that disallowing gays and lesbians to be "openly gay" in the military is a denial of their civil rights. This argument isn't only mistaken, it's misplaced. Approaching DADT as a civil rights issue is appealing and convenient, but it's really not quite that. OK, it isn't only that.

The military may be a microcosm of society in some ways, but it most definitely isn't a democracy. Individuals don't have the usual rights that we honor in civilian society and, in fact, forfeit their freedoms when they wear the uniform.

If you want to test your free speech rights, try criticizing your commanding officer.


http://www.recordnet.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20100212/A_OPINION0616/2120310/-1/NEWSMAP
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on February 12, 2010, 02:35:17 PM
Re:  Ms. Parker's opinion piece linked above

The general tone one has about a lot of opinion pieces concerning
lifting Don't Ask, Don't Tell is this hazy notion of what if--meaning a "fear"
to many people. 

What if?

As though all of a sudden things would be different.  That gays
will come out of the woodwork wearing feather boas and hitting
on everyone.

That some right-wing religious recruit might be uncomfortable.

Unit cohesion might suffer.

So we need to study it to make sure it won't harm our military.

You know what?  It already is harming the military.  The military
throws out large numbers of exemplary military personell because
of this policy every year, thereby wasting money and time.  It's an
unnecessary distraction.

Let's talk about unit cohesion.  Wouldn't a unit operate more effectively
if the gay people in it didn't have "hiding themselves" on the line.  Isn't that
a distraction to the gay people already serving in the military?  Wouldn't a
unit be better off if this threat to some of their members wasn't an issue?
It's always about the unit cohesion concerning the straight servicepeople.
The straight soldiers would be better served if the gay soldiers had one
extra burden from their minds.

Right wing religious recruits are going to be uncomfortable regardless.
According to a lot of gay people already serving, many of their comrades
in arms already know they are gay and really could care less.

This attitude that our military might fall apart if DADT is repealed is
really an insult to our military men and women.  If they cannot handle
something simple like this then how can we expect them to cope with
the more serious issues they need to be coping with.  Really.

And our commentators act like this is really an issue.  Canada, Great Britain,
the Netherlands, Japan, Israel and other enlightened countries have not had any
problems with this, and believe me, you'd have heard about it if they did! 
Let's see--North Korea, Iran, Russia, China don't allow it.  Hmmmmm.

And did we say STUDY the issue?  This issue has been studied for eons
if anyone cared to look at the studies.  They all indicate it wouldn't make a
difference.

I don't think anything will change when this is finally repealed and
everyone will be like "What took so long?"  You can be sure that the
people against removing DADT or gays in general will highlight any
little problem that does occur, though--SEE I TOLD YOU SO?

I still remember the 60 Minutes interview Lesley Stahl did with a group
of five gay military guys from all branches several years ago.  To a tee
they all said being gay and in the military wasn't a problem.  Wasn't
even an issue.  One soldier told her that the young guys grew up with
out gay people, on television and movies, if not in their own lives and
it's not a big deal.  He said they were the "Will & Grace" generation.
Lesley Stahl couldn't believe what she was hearing and kept repeating
the question to locate some problem.  None of them would indicate
any serious problem.  DADT is the problem!

It's the older generation that is having the problem.
David Brooks, a conservative columnist in the moderate vein, thinks,
even though it won't happen as fast as most would like, that they're doing
it the right way.  Another opinion piece by Frank Rich last weekend spoke
about how the Republicans have been pretty silent as a whole, except
McCain, on this because they can't really be seen as against military
people themselves who are advocating it on the one hand, and then
saying you have to believe the other military people's opinions on the
war on the other hand.  That this could be used against them in an
election year.

Whatever.  Just do it!


 has this hazy notion
problem" when in most cases there is no problem and that this "problem" has been studied ad infinitum for years.
Title: Dick Cheney Endorses DADT repeal
Post by: Jer009 on February 14, 2010, 10:30:31 AM
(snip)

Said Cheney: "Twenty years ago the military were the strong advocates of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" when I was Secretary of Defense. I think things have changed significantly since then. I see that Mike Mullen, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, has indicated his belief that we ought to support a change in the policy. So, uh, I think my guess is the policy will be changed...

http://www.towleroad.com/2010/02/watch-dick-cheney-endorses-dont-ask-dont-tell-repeal.html
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Marge_Innavera on February 15, 2010, 09:37:40 AM
(quoted)  Right wing religious recruits are going to be uncomfortable regardless. According to a lot of gay people already serving, many of their comrades in arms already know they are gay and really could care less.

This attitude that our military might fall apart if DADT is repealed is really an insult to our military men and women.  If they cannot handle
something simple like this then how can we expect them to cope with the more serious issues they need to be coping with.  Really.

I've read a number of overheated predictions that "10 percent of the military would quit" if DADT was repealed.  IMO, that's equivalent to the phenomenon in every election year of people vowing to move to another country if [fill in the blanks] wins.  In reality, very few do so.   And in the case of the military, people who left out of homophobic principle would have to sacrifice the bennies that many of them joined up to get in the first place.
Title: Paul Cameron claims gays will rape if allowed to serve openly in military
Post by: Jer009 on February 17, 2010, 08:58:56 AM
(snip)
To make a long story short, Cameron claims that the data he "compiled" shows that gays are four to seven more times likely to rape their fellow servicemen.He even says that some perpetrators of heterosexual sex assaults can be termed as gay because apparently some gay men "like women too." (that piece starts at 1:30).

http://holybulliesandheadlessmonsters.blogspot.com/2010/02/anti-gay-discredited-researcher-paul.html
Title: Alliance Defense Fund: DADT Repeal Creates New Religion
Post by: Jer009 on February 19, 2010, 09:55:54 AM
(snip)

The anti-gay Alliance Defense Fund says that if President Obama allows the repeal of DADT, he will be violating the Constitution by establishing a religion for military personnel. Wait, what?

http://joemygod.blogspot.com/2010/02/alliance-defense-fund-dadt-repeal.html
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on February 19, 2010, 01:59:38 PM
I guess it's a good sign that the opposition is grasping at straws. And looking ridiculous.

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Jer009 on February 19, 2010, 02:05:11 PM
I guess it's a good sign that the opposition is grasping at straws. And looking ridiculous.



That's for sure. An an end to the policy is looking more and more inevitable.
Title: Santorum: Military Leaders 'Indoctrinated' to Support 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell'
Post by: Jer009 on February 20, 2010, 12:29:43 PM
(snip)
A short time ago during a speech at CPAC, former GOP Senator Rick "man on dog" Santorum told those attending that military leaders had been "indoctrinated" with political correctness, forcing them to accept repeal of the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy, the Huffington Post reports:

http://www.towleroad.com/2010/02/rick-santorum-at-cpac-military-leaders-indoctrinated-to-support-dont-ask-dont-tell.html
Title: Video: Petraeus Not Sure Troops Care if Fellow Soldiers are Gay
Post by: Jer009 on February 21, 2010, 01:05:11 PM
http://www.towleroad.com/2010/02/petraeus-sexuality-not-as-important-as-skills-intelligence-in-military.html
Title: 5 Reasons Why Making Lieberman DADT Pointman Is Really, Really Terrible Idea
Post by: Jer009 on February 22, 2010, 10:41:05 AM
(snip)
Connecticut's infallible (oh how we kid) Sen. Joe Lieberman will become the White House's Senate pointman on leading the Don't Ask Don't Tell repeal, just as we expected back in October. Is this a stupid idea or what?

http://www.queerty.com/5-reasons-why-making-sen-joe-lieberman-obamas-dadt-pointmanis-really-really-terrible-idea-20100222/
Title: 'Media Matters' Exposes Myths, Pens Open Letter to Media
Post by: Jer009 on February 24, 2010, 01:16:35 PM
(snip)
Don't Ask, Don't Tell proponents too often paint a distorted picture of what a repeal would mean. Today, Media Matters for America released a comprehensive review detailing how opinion pages and cable news talk shows have been flooded with falsehoods and anti-gay rhetoric to support the dubious argument that Don't Ask, Don't Tell is working.

http://www.towleroad.com/2010/02/media-matters-exposes-myths-pens-open-letter-to-media-about-lies-and-distortions-on-dont-ask-dont-te.html
Title: Situation Normal on 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' Repeal: All F-ed Up
Post by: Jer009 on February 26, 2010, 09:20:19 AM
(snip)

After the events of this week, I think we need to be very concerned about the direction this is heading, because it doesn't look like a "clear path" when the top lawmakers are expressing doubts about any kind of vote and refocusing their efforts on just getting a moratorium. HRC is holding a Virtual Lobby Day on March 4. Maybe that's part of the master plan.

http://www.towleroad.com/2010/02/carl-levin-on-dont-ask-dont-tell-votes-not-there-for-repeal.html
Title: Media Matters releases THE definitive debunking of DADT distortions
Post by: Jer009 on March 01, 2010, 02:12:40 PM
(snip)

Media Matters recently released an excellent report debunking the myths and falsehoods spread about Don't Ask, Don't Tell.

http://holybulliesandheadlessmonsters.blogspot.com/2010/02/media-matters-releases-definitive.html
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on March 02, 2010, 10:25:25 AM
Always good links, Jer.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Jer009 on March 02, 2010, 11:23:51 AM
Always good links, Jer.

Thanks, Lyle!
Title: Chaplains Keep Wary Eye On Don't Ask/Don't Tell Repeal
Post by: Jer009 on March 03, 2010, 10:37:45 AM
(snip)

The three men also wrote an eight-page document called "What the Military Would Look Like Without `Don't Ask/Don't Tell."' It says chaplains can't perform duties that violate the teachings of their faith but are "duty bound" to assist military members with referrals for requested services.

"I think there's been a lot of jousting at straw men," Gundlach said. "I think there's still going to be plenty of room to provide ministries according to our own faith groups. So far (gay) marriage is not legitimate because of public laws in most places."

http://blog.beliefnet.com/news/2010/02/chaplains-keep-wary-eye-on-don.php
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on March 03, 2010, 12:27:14 PM
This is another of those kinds of ideas that if you are gay you cannot
be religious or spiritual.  It also surmises there are no gay chaplains.

Quote
From the article:

Vicalvi, of the NAE's Chaplains Commission, said evangelicals'
opposition to the change is not a reflection of homophobia but
rather their belief that "homosexuality is a sin just like every other
sin."

"We are not against homosexual people."

I am so tired of hearing this idea.  Yes.  You ARE
against homosexual people.  Gay people.
If you don't believe that someone should be able
to be who they are without sublimating themselves
or going through conversion therapies, then you are
against us being who God created us to be.  If you
can't see that then you are truly blind.  Stop saying
the above sentiments to make yourselves feel better.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: marina on March 03, 2010, 01:33:20 PM
I cannot wait for DADT to become history, and that finally we will join other countries in having all of our people, no matter their race, sex, sexual orientation, or religion, be able to proudly serve their country openly in their military.   I will be following the progress of this with interest.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: jim ... on March 04, 2010, 05:42:24 AM
I cannot wait for DADT to become history, and that finally we will join other countries in having all of our people, no matter their race, sex, sexual orientation, or religion, be able to proudly serve their country openly in their military.   I will be following the progress of this avidly.

welcome to the forum Marina .... should you have any questions, please feel free to ask!
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Marge_Innavera on March 04, 2010, 09:38:06 AM
I cannot wait for DADT to become history, and that finally we will join other countries in having all of our people, no matter their race, sex, sexual orientation, or religion, be able to proudly serve their country openly in their military.   I will be following the progress of this avidly.

Glad to see you here, Marina -- good post!    :)
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: marina on March 04, 2010, 10:22:11 AM
Hi Jim, Marge and everyone -

Thanks for the welcome!  :)
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Jer009 on March 17, 2010, 03:10:07 PM
POLL: More Than 70% Of Iraq And Afghanistan Veterans Comfortable Serving Alongside Openly Gay Troops

http://thinkprogress.org/2010/03/16/vet-voice-poll-dadt/
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: BayCityJohn on March 18, 2010, 11:49:18 AM
Choi Chained to White House Gates

In what appears to be an unscripted act of civil disobedience following a Human Rights Campaign rally for the repeal of "don't ask, don't tell" in Washington on Thursday, Lt. Dan Choi has led a group of protesters to the White House, where he has handcuffed himself to the front gates along with former Army infantryman James Pietrangelo.

Police officers are blocking the gates of the White House with yellow tape and are pushing back about 100 protesters, who are chanting DADT repeal slogans and reciting the Pledge of Allegiance.


http://advocate.com/News/Daily_News/2010/03/18/Dan_Choi_Protests_in_Front_of_WH/ (http://advocate.com/News/Daily_News/2010/03/18/Dan_Choi_Protests_in_Front_of_WH/)
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Rosewood on March 19, 2010, 03:32:54 PM
Another way to go about it.
A photographer snaps pix of gay men and women in the military in an effort
to draw attention to, perhaps, the absurdity of the situation.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/18/fashion/18sheng.html?ref=books
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on March 20, 2010, 10:21:11 AM

Lt. Dan Choi + Capt. Jim Pietrangelo Plead Not Guilty, Will Go to Trial

http://www.queerty.com/breaking-20100319/ (http://www.queerty.com/breaking-dan-choi-jim-pietrangelo-plead-not-guilty-will-go-to-trial-20100319/)

Dan Choi tells the judge:  "Not guilty, not ashamed, and not finished."
Sounds like a great line from a film!  Why I like gay men:  In this little
article about the event, after he relays what Dan Choi said to the judge,
"not guilty, not ashamed, and not finished," the author then writes:
"Oh snap!"

Ya gotta love it!  It never hurts to have a sense of humor about anything!
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: marina on March 20, 2010, 10:54:08 AM
((((Lt. Dan Choi + Capt. Jim Pietrangelo))))

You've got to give them credit for standing up for what they believe in, and this act of civil disobedience it just shows how important the matter is.

Best of luck to them and much support,

M
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Jer009 on March 29, 2010, 10:17:05 AM
British Military Hosts Gay Wedding Reception In Barracks

(snip)

 "The entire regiment has been really supportive," he said. "When I went to ask the Squadron Leader, Major Nana Twumasi-Ankrah, for permission to get married, he just said 'This is fantastic, congratulations'." "The lads joked it was the gay event of the year. Everyone was excited. It was the talk of the barracks. This generation of soldiers is completely liberal," added the junior non-commissioned officer, whose only regret was that some of his friends would not be back from Afghanistan in time to enjoy the nuptials.

http://joemygod.blogspot.com/2010/03/british-military-hosts-gay-wedding.html
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on March 31, 2010, 11:07:18 AM
U.S. general apologizes for Dutch gay soldier remark
by Ben Berkowitz
Reuters
March 30, 2010


Quote
AMSTERDAM (Reuters) - A retired U.S. general has apologized for comments this month linking the defeat of Dutch troops by Serb forces at Srebrenica in July 1995 to the presence of openly gay soldiers in the Dutch military.

On March 18, former NATO Supreme Allied Commander John Sheehan told a U.S. congressional hearing that European armies had been weakened by efforts to "socialize" them, including allowing gay soldiers to serve.
[...]
Prime Minister Jan Peter Balkenende said his comments were "beneath contempt", the Defense Ministry called them "absolute nonsense" and the head of the gay soldiers' group SHK called them "the ridiculous convulsion of a loner".

Another group, calling itself the Pink Army, began soliciting donations and potential plaintiffs as it contemplated a defamation lawsuit against Sheehan in the United States. The group said it would drop those plans following the apology.


more:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/30/AR2010033003240.html

I say:  The General is sorry for his recollection.  I really doubt he'd be apologizing if not for the threat of an expensive lawduit against him.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: CellarDweller115 on April 02, 2010, 06:15:15 AM
Pentagon faces hurdles in 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' study

From Mike Mount, CNN Senior Pentagon Producer


Washington (CNN) -- As the Pentagon tries to move forward with studying the effects of repealing the ban on openly gay troops serving in the military, Defense Secretary Robert Gates is finding hurdles at almost every corner.

As part of that study, Gates asked for the opinions of gay troops. However under the current "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" law, gay troops cannot reveal their sexual orientation, and the law prevents the military from asking about it.

Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell said Thursday that a third party will have to be brought in to poll homosexual troops about their thoughts on repealing the ban to get around the law.

http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/04/02/gays.military/?hpt=T2
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: CellarDweller115 on April 02, 2010, 06:20:00 AM

Military's refusal to discharge lesbian a new Catch-22

By Julian E. Barnes


Reporting from Washington - Lt. Robin R. Chaurasiya wasn't exactly asked, but she told anyway: She is a lesbian, and in a civil union with another woman.

Her commander at Scott Air Force Base in Illinois, Lt. Gen. Robert R. Allardice, could have discharged her under the Pentagon's "don't ask, don't tell" policy. Instead, he determined in February that she should remain in the Air Force because she acknowledged her sexual orientation for the purpose of "avoiding and terminating military service."

Chaurasiya says that is not true. But the general's reasoning has the flavor of a Catch-22: If you admit to being homosexual you can be discharged from the military, but if you admit it for the purposes of being discharged you won't be.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-dont-ask2-2010apr02,0,718748.story
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on April 02, 2010, 11:25:33 AM
I've often wondered if any straight guys ever tried to get out of their military service by pretending they were gay?  I've never heard of it happening, but you think it must have, right?  Especially when the draft was in place.  I mean, you say you're gay and out you go in the past.    Of course, that's the premise of that film The Gay Deceivers.  Two straight guys pretend they're gay to avoid the draft.  Anyone ever see that?
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on April 02, 2010, 12:14:49 PM
I've always wondered in today's climate if the government reinstated the draft. First of all, so many straight men would claim to be gay, it would be hilarious! And even the most conservative homophobes would have to reconsider their opposition in order to maintain military readiness.

Military discrimination against gay people is a "luxury" only available during peacetime.

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fofol on April 13, 2010, 01:31:50 PM
   I haven't seen The Gay Deceivers, but Across the Universe does have a scene reminiscent of my time in the military - at the Army reception center, after the inspection, one of the lead characters, Max, when asked if there's any reason he shouldn't be in the military, he says he's 'a cross-dressing, homosexual...with a spot on my lung,' and the captain asks him if he has flat feet.  When he says no, the Captain welcomes him into the Army...  Back then, there was one question on the form everyone had to fill out that asked if you were a homosexual: to get in, all you had to do was check 'no' - nobody asked any questions.  Hell I got in even partially aroused at the naked athlete in front of me... ::)
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on May 03, 2010, 07:12:27 PM

Gates's 'don't ask' letter angers gay rights groups
Federal Eye, May,2010

Quote
Gay rights groups and supportive Democratic lawmakers
spent the weekend striking back at Defense Secretary
Robert Gates and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Adm.
Mike Mullen and their request that Congress not vote to repeal
the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy until after the Pentagon
finishes a review of a potential repeal.  [...] In a letter sent Friday
to House Armed Services Committee Chairman Ike Skelton (D-Mo.),
the Pentagon leaders said imposing a moratorium on the military's
gay ban before the end of a review "would send a very damaging
message to our men and women in uniform that in essence, their
views, concerns and perspectives do not matter on an issue with
such a direct impact and consequence for them and their families."

The letter -- a "joint political decision" by Obama and Gates,
"showed a lack of respect for our GLBT service members who are
on the frontlines every day risking their lives for our safety," Sarvis said.

I say:  Since when are the "views, concerns and perspectives" of
the military asked for when the leaders make decisions?  Do they
consult with them on other military matters?

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/gates_letter.html (http://voices.washingtonpost.com/federal-eye/2010/05/gates_dont_ask_letter_angers_g.html)
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: tonydude on May 12, 2010, 10:51:16 PM
 Video made by soldiers in Iraq, spoofing an openly gay military.

NSFW

 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Upi2DNRKdyU#lq-lq2-hq-vhq

Definitely  NSFW.  Some heavy rump-upping. Could be of aerobic value, though  :D.



edited by moderator
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on May 14, 2010, 05:02:34 PM

California urges end to 'don't ask, don't tell' policy
by Cathy Bussewitz
Associated Press Writer
05/13/2010  4:32 pm

Quote
SACRAMENTO, Calif.—The California Legislature passed a resolution Thursday urging the federal government to end its "don't ask, don't tell" policy on gays in the military.

The state Assembly passed the resolution on a 51-17 vote after a lengthy debate on the virtues of equality and the nature of the military.

The state Senate already approved the resolution, which urges President Barack Obama and Congress to adopt the Military Readiness Enhancement Act of 2009. It recommends the military adopt a policy of nondiscrimination based on sexual orientation.

Opponents said the Legislature should focus on solving the budget crisis, not telling the federal government what to do.

The resolution now goes to Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.

more:
http://www.mercurynews.com/news/ci_15079335?nclick_check=1
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: tonydude on May 17, 2010, 08:03:15 PM
  The video of the Iraq soldiers spoofing an all-gay military, that I posted above, has been withdrawn.  I have very little doubt the military pressured the guy who made it to yank it quickly, before their phony stories of morale problems evaporated in full view of the world.  And if that is so, they have interfered with his right of free speech, not on the polemic issue of tolerance, but on the creativity issue.  They allowed the "Telephone" spoof because it suited them.  This one didn't.
  It's too bad the gay leadership doesn't see the opportunity to use this arbitrary action as a lever to shake things up some.  What are they waiting for, a mating call?
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on May 22, 2010, 04:55:52 PM
http://seminal.firedoglake.com/diary/49812/

Pelosi: “DADT Will Be a Memory By Christmas”

Quote
Tonight at Equality California’s kickoff event for Harvey Milk Weekend at San Francisco’s Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender Community Center, to celebrate the eightieth birthday of the first LGBT American to have a state-commemorated day, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi assured the assembled A-list LGBT crowd:

"I believe DADT will be a memory by Christmas."

The Speaker also highlighted the hard work this Congress will do to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act, pass a gender-expression-inclusive iENDA (inclusive Employment Non-Discrimination Act), and enact LGBT-friendly family immigration law, but it was on Don’t-Ask-Don’t-Tell that she was most specific.



Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: gnash on May 22, 2010, 09:46:15 PM
that would be great news.. somebody should write a special christmas carol celebrating the repeal. :D

ugh. if it wasn't for the damn uptight heteros, life would be so much easier for everybody all around. :P ;)

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: tonydude on May 22, 2010, 11:04:54 PM
  Let's see.  This is the DADT thread.  And the ad beneath it is: "Master of Arts in Military History" program, from Norwich University. Is this a computer cookie monster thing, or, are they, like, swingers?
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: gnash on May 23, 2010, 11:53:06 PM
LOL. i got "70% off fabulous furnishings and home decor every day" from one kings lane..

maybe it depends on the forum member. ;) :D

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: lislis on May 24, 2010, 10:49:53 PM
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/05/24/AR2010052403681_pf.html

President Obama has endorsed a "don't ask, don't tell" compromise between lawmakers and the Defense Department, the White House announced Monday, an agreement that may sidestep a key obstacle to repealing the military's policy banning gay men and lesbians from serving openly in the armed forces.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: BayCityJohn on May 24, 2010, 11:01:54 PM
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/05/24/AR2010052403681_pf.html

President Obama has endorsed a "don't ask, don't tell" compromise between lawmakers and the Defense Department, the White House announced Monday, an agreement that may sidestep a key obstacle to repealing the military's policy banning gay men and lesbians from serving openly in the armed forces.


Quote
Lawmakers will now, within days, vote on amendments that would repeal the Clinton-era policy, with a provision ensuring that any change would not take effect until after the Pentagon completes a study about its impact on troops. That study is due to Congress by Dec. 1.

Quote
"The language would not include a automatic nondiscrimination policy but rather will return authority of the regulations for open service by gays and lesbians to the Pentagon

This is not good news.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: BayCityJohn on May 24, 2010, 11:46:23 PM
Quote
The views of the troops will be an integral part of the nearly year-long review of the ramifications of open military service by gays, according to the parameters of the study released Tuesday by the Pentagon.
http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/news/2010/03/military_dontask_review_gates_030210w/ (http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/news/2010/03/military_dontask_review_gates_030210w/)


Quote
A March 2010 poll by the Military Times asking over 3000 servicemembers "do you favor or oppose allowing gays and lesbians to serve openly in the military?" resulted in 51% oppose votes, with 24% in favor and the remaining neutral or declining to answer.
"Gays in the Military". Military Times  (Marine Corps Times): pp. 7. 22 March 201
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Dave Cullen on May 26, 2010, 04:15:26 PM
The Daily Beast has a stunning piece from Afghanistan today, by a Lt. Colonel, fighting the war there right now, on active duty, who's lying to all his buddies in his unit about his husband, and everything else in his personal life. Two of his friends died in battle last week, which crushed him. He talked to his husband about it, but had to hide the relief that call gave him from his other friends.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2010-05-26/gay-army-soldier-in-afghanistan-on-dont-ask-dont-tell/full/

I cried reading much of it. It's the best thing I've ever read on gays in the military, because it's so incredibly candid. He cops to shitty things he's done, laws he has broken (confiding to close friends in the Army that he's gay, and married broke the law), he doesn't whine or preach, just lays out what life is like for him, and the isolation he feels.

I hope you'll pass it along.

Congress is expected to vote on overturning Don't Ask, Don't Tell this week. The vote is starting to look like it will fail. John McCain and some others are saying the country needs to wait, and not cram it down our throats. But another year--or two or five, or ten years, because a Republican house of Congress will surely refuse to repeal the ban--means another year or two or five or ten years with guys like this living like this. It matters every single day to these guys. It's not politics to them: it's just a right to live without lying, without sealing themselves away

I hope you this piece helps some people see what life is like for the hundreds of thousands of gay soldiers living this way every day. I hope you'll pass it on.

Thanks.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: atruant on May 26, 2010, 04:39:01 PM
Thank YOU Dave, for the link to the article.

Wonderful piece which I can identify with in an earlier time. I was a Lt. Colonel in the Canadian Military with a policy of Dare Not Tell or They Will Kick You Out.

That policy disappeared in 1993. I am SO hoping the US will succeed in the same way.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on May 26, 2010, 06:31:01 PM
May it come to pass, John.

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: KittyHawk on May 26, 2010, 07:17:07 PM
I received this email today, in case anyone wants to call their congressperson:

Quote
Dear Lydia --

If you could end a discriminatory federal law that has destroyed thousands of lives, made our nation weaker and that its original sponsor now rejects... would you?

I would.

That's why it's time to help the heroic Sen. Carl Levin and Rep. Patrick Murphy line up the votes in the Senate and House to eliminate "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" from federal statute.

In the next 24 hours, the fate of DADT could come down to one vote on the Senate Armed Services Committee. If a repeal amendment to the Defense Authorization bill -- supported by committee Chairman Levin -- passes, Rep. Murphy will then offer an identical amendment to the Defense Authorization bill on the floor of the House of Representatives.

Will it pass? Only if we call our congressmembers today and flood their phone lines. If you support the amendment to repeal "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," please call your representative ASAP and urge them to cast a"Yes" vote.

Call the House of Representatives now: 202-224-3121

Report what happened on your House call here:

http://www.couragecampaign.org/HouseCall

Sen. Levin and Rep. Murphy are supported by nearly 100,000 Americans who signed Gov. Howard Dean's open letter calling for action on DADT now. In an astonishing demonstration of grassroots people power, more than 15,000 Courage Campaign and Democracy for America members signed up to deliver the letter to Senate offices in all 50 states this week.

If Congress passes this amendment, President Obama will have the responsibility and authority to work with the Pentagon to allow gays and lesbians -- the valuable translators, tank drivers, Marines, medics and combat troops willing to take a bullet to protect our country -- to serve openly in the military.

By calling Congress today and telling your representative to vote for the amendment to repeal DADT, you can give Rep. Murphy and Sen. Levin the support they need when it is most needed.

Call the House of Representatives now: 202-224-3121

Report what happened on your House call here:

http://www.couragecampaign.org/HouseCall

Once Congress passes repeal legislation, we will then focus on making sure the White House and the Pentagon finish the job.

Thank you for making this critical call to your congressmember today to put an end to Don't Ask, Don't Tell.

Rick Jacobs
Chair, Courage Campaign

P.S. Repealing DADT is just one front in our national campaign to bring full equality to America. We're also hard at work preparing for Phase 2 of "Testimony: Equality on Trial" -- our year-long campaign to bring the Prop 8 trial into the lives of Americans. With closing arguments in Perry v. Schwarzenegger coming up on June 16, stay tuned to your inbox for updates.

 - - - - -

Courage Campaign Equality is a part of the Courage Campaign's multi-issue online organizing network that empowers more than 700,000 grassroots and netroots supporters to push for progressive change and full equality in California and across the country.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: KittyHawk on May 26, 2010, 08:02:12 PM
From Roll Call:

Republicans Threaten Filibuster Over ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’

http://www.rollcall.com/news/46798-1.html
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on May 27, 2010, 03:46:49 PM
DADT round-up
by: Adam Bink

http://www.openleft.com/diary/18866/dadt-roundup

A good listing of where things currently stand and links to
articles about each one of these points, including things like:

Quote
Johnny Mac [John McCain]- who, I found out, has a gay former
chief of staff running his pander factory re-election campaign,
is now threatening to filibuster the full defense authorization
bill on the floor.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: lislis on May 27, 2010, 10:53:03 PM
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/05/27/AR2010052704540.html

Earlier Thursday, the Senate Armed Services Committee also voted to change the policy, on a 16 to 12 vote. Sen. James Webb (D-Va.) joined 11 Republicans in opposing the change, while Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) voted with the Democrats. The full Senate is likely to consider the issue next month.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Dal on May 30, 2010, 01:49:29 AM
The young among us may not know Barry Goldwater,  Mr Conservative,   Senator from Arizona who ran against LBJ.  He was painted by the Democrats as a dangerous crazy man -- as Ron Paul, Howard Dean and other are now.  But he was pro-choice, and against religion up in your face in public.   And here's what said about days in the military.  An old article from Arizona Republic -- in full.  Today's 'conservative base'  is so predictable and stupid!

*****************

The Arizona Republic/Associated Press
Jun. 11, 1993 12:00 PM

Former Arizona Sen. Barry Goldwater declared Thursday that the military should lift its ban on gays and said he thought the American people weren't strongly opposed to the move.

''I see no harm at all with having gays in the military,'' Goldwater, the 1964 GOP presidential nominee, said on CNN's Larry King Live talk show.

Furthermore, Goldwater said he didn't think the public would be upset if the ban were lifted.


''I think that if you left it up to the American people, the attitude would be, 'What the hell, there's nothing wrong with a gay as long as he doesn't misbehave himself,' '' Goldwater said.

The comments on the King show were a follow-up to an opinion article by Goldwater in Thursday's Washington Post in which he said gays should be allowed in the military. The article also appears today in The Arizona Republic.

Conservatives and former colleagues accepted Goldwater's blunt comments with deference but said they are not ready to embrace his position.

''I certainly would respect his comments,'' said Sam Nunn, D-Ga., chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee. ''I don't agree with it.''

Sen. Dan Coats, R-Ind., said Goldwater ''has a history of saying the unexpected and doing the unexpected.''

Goldwater said in his article that after 50 years in politics and the military, he still marvels that people can get upset over nothing.

''Lifting the ban on gays in the military isn't exactly nothing, but it's pretty damned close,'' wrote the salty-tongued Republican.

He qualified his position slightly on the King show.

He told King that gays would cause no problem in the Air Force but that ''there might be some question'' about service in the Army, where homosexual and heterosexual soldiers would have to share foxholes.

Goldwater is a conservative who supports abortion rights and has challenged the Christian fundamentalist wing of the Republican Party, as he did in the last election when he backed Democrat Karan English over a GOP candidate supported by the religious right. English won an Arizona seat in the U.S. House.

Goldwater said conservatives who supported the military ban were ignoring their movement's core principle, ''that government should stay out of people's private lives.''

He said that studies have proven homosexuals are not security risks and that the ban ultimately will be lifted anyway.

''I think it's high time to pull the curtains on this charade of a policy,'' he wrote.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Dave Cullen on May 31, 2010, 04:53:08 PM
i am so glad and pretty damn surprised that the repeal bills passed both huge hurdles this week.

many steps to go, though. mccain and friends will continue trying to oppress us on the senate floor. what a scumbag.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: suelyblu on May 31, 2010, 05:16:38 PM
One of the saddest thing I have read :

" When I was in the Military they gave me a Medal for killing two men
   and a Discharge for loving one"

                               Epitaph of Lenard P Matkovich.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: BayCityJohn on May 31, 2010, 08:20:13 PM
One of the saddest thing I have read :

" When I was in the Military they gave me a Medal for killing two men
   and a Discharge for loving one"

                               Epitaph of Lenard P Matkovich.

On Memorial Day 35 years ago Walter Cronkite introduced America to the first gay man they'd ever heard had won a Purple Heart: TSGT Leonard Matlovich USAF.

http://leonardmatlovich.com/
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: suelyblu on May 31, 2010, 08:50:37 PM
Thanks for the link BCJ.           ^^^
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Marge_Innavera on June 03, 2010, 10:08:51 AM
from Jeremy Hooper at Good As You, (http://www.goodasyou.org/) via JoeMyGod: (http://joemygod.blogspot.com/2010/06/phillip-spooner-chorale.html)


"Last fall 86 year old WWII veteran Phillip Spooner delivered the below stirring speech against the ultimately successful campaign to repeal marriage equality in Maine. His inspiring speech was posted on this and many other blogs."

Some of Mr. Spooner's testimony has since been adapted to choral music:

(http://i135.photobucket.com/albums/q135/talkstocoyotes/OmahaBeachchorus.jpg) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dqkvk1iNkYw)
..
(click on image to view)

Quote
Melissa Dunphy's new composition "What do you think I fought for at Omaha Beach?" was selected as the winning work for the 2010 Simon Carrington Chamber Singers Composition Competition. The Philadelphia-based composer's choral work sets excerpts of public testimony given by a WWII veteran before the Maine Senate in a hearing to discuss the Marriage Equality Bill. "What do you think I fought for at Omaha Beach?" was performed on May 29, 2010, at Grace and Holy Trinity in Kansas City, Missouri and First Presbyterian Church in Lawrence, Kansas. This video is taken from initial footage of the recording session on May 30, 2010, at Blessed Sacrament Church in Kansas City, Kansas.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on June 06, 2010, 09:37:40 AM
(http://content.cartoonbox.slate.com/?feature=e99b9e9baea72a5d45b9067f5a30e158)

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: BayCityJohn on June 11, 2010, 11:53:10 AM
Mayor Fears "Limp-Wristed" Soldiers

Yuma, Ariz. Mayor Al Krieger did not hold back at a Memorial Day service at a local cemetery when talking about the prospect of allowing gay and lesbian service members to serve openly in the military.

“I cannot believe that a bunch of lacey-drawered, limp-wristed people could do what those men have done in the past.”

http://advocate.com/News/Daily_News/2010/06/11/Mayor_Fears_Limp_Wristed_Soldiers/ (http://advocate.com/News/Daily_News/2010/06/11/Mayor_Fears_Limp_Wristed_Soldiers/)
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: atruant on June 11, 2010, 03:42:39 PM
Mayor Fears "Limp-Wristed" Soldiers

Yuma, Ariz. Mayor Al Krieger did not hold back at a Memorial Day service at a local cemetery when talking about the prospect of allowing gay and lesbian service members to serve openly in the military.

“I cannot believe that a bunch of lacey-drawered, limp-wristed people could do what those men have done in the past.”

http://advocate.com/News/Daily_News/2010/06/11/Mayor_Fears_Limp_Wristed_Soldiers/ (http://advocate.com/News/Daily_News/2010/06/11/Mayor_Fears_Limp_Wristed_Soldiers/)

Thanks John!

 I recommend folks read the comments to the piece, where this jerk is suitably and eloquently put down....
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: gnash on July 14, 2010, 01:15:20 AM

(http://taxine.com/fullerspicer/gaysinthemilitaryCD.jpg)

tracks include:

Hips or Lips?

T.U.L.I.P.

Orgy at the Massacre (Live)

Johnny "Constant" Love

Human Canonball

::)

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on July 14, 2010, 02:00:35 PM

(http://taxine.com/fullerspicer/gaysinthemilitaryCD.jpg)

tracks include:

Hips or Lips?

T.U.L.I.P.

Orgy at the Massacre (Live)

Johnny "Constant" Love

Human Canonball

::)


I wonder what the acronym for T.U.L.I.P. is?
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: gnash on July 15, 2010, 11:38:37 PM
i'll try to find the song online. :D
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: atruant on July 23, 2010, 04:02:49 PM
A couple of interesting links folks, the first sad, the second encouraging:

Lt Choi's statement regarding his discharge:

http://www.ltdanchoi.com/

And Knights Out, which is an organization of West Point Alumni, Staff and Faculty who are united in supporting the rights of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender soldiers to openly serve their country.

http://www.knightsout.org/
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on July 31, 2010, 06:22:58 PM
Three articles over the last two months:

U.S. Intelligence Analyst Arrested in Wikileaks Video Probe
By Kevin Poulsen and Kim Zetter 
June 6, 2010  | 

Quote
Federal officials have arrested an Army intelligence analyst who boasted of giving classified U.S. combat video and hundreds of thousands of classified State Department records to whistleblower site Wikileaks, Wired.com has learned.

SPC Bradley Manning, of Potomac, Maryland, was stationed at Forward Operating Base Hammer, 40 miles east of Baghdad, where he was arrested nearly two weeks ago by the Army’s Criminal Investigation Division. A family member says he’s being held in custody in Kuwait.  Manning, who is half-British, has not been formally charged, The Daily Telegraph reports.

Manning was turned in late last month by a former computer hacker with whom he spoke online. In the course of their chats, Manning took credit for leaking a headline-making video of a helicopter attack that Wikileaks posted online in April. The video showed a 2007 U.S. helicopter air strike in Baghdad that claimed the lives of several innocent civilians.
[...]
“United States Division-Center is currently conducting a joint investigation” says the statement, which notes that Manning is deployed with 2nd Brigade 10th Mountain Division in Baghdad. “The results of the investigation will be released upon completion of the investigation.”

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/06/leak/
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on July 31, 2010, 06:25:03 PM

Collateral Damage from Don’t Ask Don’t Tell?
By MICHAEL ROSTON
July 6, 2010

Quote
Following on Wired’s report that the Army had arrested intelligence analyst Bradley Manning in Iraq on suspicion that he had leaked the ‘Collateral Murder’ video to WikiLeaks (and other documents), I looked into how Manning’s motivations might be used in our nation’s fraught political discourse on national security.

Now via a Gawker commenter, another possibility is proffered as driving Manning to harvest sensitive intel that could be used to give a black eye to the American diplomatic and national security apparatus: maybe Manning was gay.
[...]
Could it be he was upset with the policies that prevent out gay men and lesbian women from serving our armed forces, and felt foolishly like he was getting payback against a military that wouldn’t allow him to be himself?

If it is revealed in the course of the investigation that Manning is gay, I suspect it will be a setback to the people who are righteously moving to scrap Don’t Ask Don’t Tell. One of the long culture warrior objections to letting gays serve in the military is the wrongheaded charge that they are disloyal and can’t be trusted. If Manning really did what the military and the feds are accusing him of doing, he’ll be held forth as exhibit number one by the people who are trying stop the progress President Obama and the Democratic Congress have made toward overturning Don’t Ask Don’t Tell. I hope that the advocates of the repeal are ready for that debate to be had.

http://trueslant.com/level/bradley-mannings/ (http://trueslant.com/level/2010/06/07/is-bradley-mannings-collateral-murder-wikileaks-leak-collateral-damage-from-dont-ask-dont-tell/)
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on July 31, 2010, 06:39:20 PM

Army Widens Probe Into WikiLeaks Scandal
Hugh Collins
Contributor AOL News
(July 31)

Quote
-- Bradley Manning, the Army private accused of leaking an air strike video, was in solitary confinement Saturday as suspicion mounted about his possible involvement in the recent WikiLeaks scandal and prosecutors investigated whether anyone else should join him behind bars.

According to CNN, Manning is the prime suspect in the recent case, in which thousands of classified documents about the war in Afghanistan were leaked by WikiLeaks to publications including The New York Times and The Guardian.

http://www.aolnews.com/nation/article/bradley-manning/ (http://www.aolnews.com/nation/article/wikileaks-suspect-bradley-manning-in-solitary-confinement-as-probe-widens/19576150)

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Dave Cullen on August 09, 2010, 11:30:53 AM
Interesting perspectives in this great NY Mag profile:

The Ke$ha-Loving, Command-Defying Army Auteur

http://nymag.com/news/features/67399/

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Dave Cullen on August 09, 2010, 11:31:09 AM
his blah blah blah video is here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ya9iFYmdYp4
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: tonydude on August 09, 2010, 12:09:24 PM
    The earlier video was posted here, a few pages back, before it was taken down.  Big mistake on the Pentagon's part: the revised version is even better.  It was interesting to read that the President saw these guys goofing off this way and laughed his ass off.
  But, I do repeat what I said before: these straight guys do gay dancing better than gays, and there will be general indignation at the clubs. 
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: tonydude on August 09, 2010, 01:29:45 PM
  In the article posted above, there was also a link to Wilson's video about life in Iraq.  The whole story of their experiences at war are deeply moving.  But, with reference to the topic here, the other video starts off with a brief reference to gays in the military, and Wilson, tossing a football, says: "I don't care".
  DADT......replaced by "I don't care?"  This shows, as does his music video, that the young guys don't care; they've got survival in the field issues.  It's an older officer problem.
    The only mumbling about repeal that I could detect, in the article, was that, (if I got this right), there would be stern new fraternization rules, and the normal goofing off and comaraderie of straight guys, would be punished.
   This is an ongoing story, completely unexpected by many, straight or gay, showing that the new generation doesn't care. This is important.  But so, too, is a good laugh.  And that video, ranks, as one of the best.  Who knew straight guys, soldiers, could rump wag so well?  I think a guy needs to be physically fit and fairly limber to get that going.....

  
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on August 16, 2010, 04:15:29 PM
This may well be old news to many people, but today in an interview on NPR's Tell Me More, I was made aware of what LtCol Victor Fehrenbach is being subjected to by DADT. This man is a 19 year veteran of the Air Force and has flown combat missions in Iraq, Afghanistan and Kosovo. I am proud of the service that this Notre Dame grad has given to my country, and am angered at the way he is being treated by his superiors. He neither asked nor told, but was outed by a civilian employee on his base, a person who has had a history of vindictiveness to those who have crossed him.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=129143367&ft=1&f=1001&utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=129233177

http://www.towleroad.com/2010/08/lt-col-victor-fehrenbach-sues-to-block-discharge-under-dadt.html

http://www.towleroad.com/victor-fehrenbach/

Listening to this at work today really got me ticked off.


Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: CellarDweller115 on August 16, 2010, 04:26:28 PM
Fritz, you should post that on your FaceBook page.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on August 16, 2010, 05:02:02 PM
Good idea, Chuck! Done!

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on August 16, 2010, 07:29:15 PM
Some details from the Idaho Statesman as to how LtCol Fehrenbach came to be outed in the first place.

http://www.idahostatesman.com/2009/08/23/874410/gay-boise-air-force-pilot-outed.html

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on August 17, 2010, 03:42:11 PM
A picture of two officers the military is trying to drum out of the service.

(http://blog.mattalgren.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/choi-fehrenbach.jpg)

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: tonydude on August 17, 2010, 03:50:50 PM
  When this is all over, I wonder if they will allow those who want to return to military service, to do so.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on August 17, 2010, 04:07:45 PM
If the ban were overturned, I would expect the services to allow discharged members to return, since the reason for their discharge would no longer exist. And I would also expect that many who are still fit enough to rejoin and who desire most ardently to serve their country would do so.

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: atruant on August 18, 2010, 08:46:38 AM
Thanks for posting these links, Fritz. I too was ticked off about LtCol Fehrenbach's case. In the early 1990s I was also a LtCol fighter pilot in the Canadian air force when homosexuals could still be booted from our military. I had to be very careful.

I hope DADT will eventually be deep-sixed as it was here.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on August 18, 2010, 03:50:32 PM
Amen, John. May it be, as swiftly as possible.

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Jer009 on August 20, 2010, 02:20:49 PM
SU Action Fund 2nd Ad on DADT

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QpgLdnDiH4o&feature=player_embedded

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: BayCityJohn on September 09, 2010, 08:58:07 PM
A federal judge in Southern California has declared the U.S. military's ban on openly gay service members unconstitutional because the ban violates the First Amendment rights of gays and lesbians.


U.S. District Judge Virginia Phillips said Thursday she will issue an injunction that will halt the enforcement of the government's "don't ask, don't tell" policy nationwide.


Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2010/09/09/state/n183353D12.DTL&tsp=1#ixzz0z5kQlwsq (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2010/09/09/state/n183353D12.DTL&tsp=1#ixzz0z5kQlwsq)
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on September 10, 2010, 10:51:03 AM
More info today:

Quote
Calif. Judge Rules Military's Ban on Gays Unconstitutional
Updated: 2 hours 8 minutes ago
Theunis Bates Contributor

(Sept. 10) -- A federal judge in Riverside, Calif., has ruled that the U.S. military's ban on openly gay service personnel is unconstitutional, declaring that the so-called "don't ask, don't tell'' policy violates the First and Fifth Amendment rights of lesbians and gay men.

In her ruling, U.S. District Judge Virginia Phillips said that Justice Department attorneys had failed to prove that the policy "significantly furthers government interests in military readiness or troop cohesion, or that discharge is necessary to those interests."

By contrast, Phillips noted that booting homosexuals out of the armed forces actually damaged military readiness, as these men and women possessed "critically needed skills ... including Arabic, Chinese, Farsi, or Korean language fluency; military intelligence; counterterrorism; weapons development; and medicine."

She also noted that the Pentagon routinely delayed discharging troops suspected of violating the policy until they had completed tours in Iraq and Afghanistan, and that the number of discharges has fallen significantly since the beginning of the Afghan conflict in 2001. That suggested the military knew that the presence of openly gay personnel on the front lines had no impact on its war-fighting capabilities.

Phillips said she would now issue an injunction banning the government from enforcing the policy, which bars the military from asking about a person's sexual orientation but allows gays to be discharged if they openly discuss their sexuality.

http://www.aolnews.com/nation/article/military-ban-unconstitutional (http://www.aolnews.com/nation/article/california-judge-virginia-phillips-rules-militarys-ban-on-gays-unconstitutional/19628294?icid=main%7Cmain%7Cdl1%7Csec1_lnk3%7C169642)
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on September 14, 2010, 02:21:36 PM
Senate to Take Up Big Pentagon Bill
by DAVID HERSZENHORN

Quote
The Senate majority leader, Harry Reid of Nevada, told colleagues on Monday that he was
planning to take up the annual Pentagon authorization bill next week. The bill includes a provision
that would allow the Defense Department to end the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy in relation to
gay and lesbian soldiers.

Mr. Reid informed the Senate Republican leader, Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, of his decision during
a meeting on Monday afternoon, aides said.

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/09/13/senate-to-take-up-big-pentagon-bill/
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on September 20, 2010, 05:40:40 PM

Aaron Belkin: Five myths about 'don't ask, don't tell'
Monday, September 20, 2010

--DADT was created to promote unit cohesion and military readiness. 

--Repealing DADT will be complicated.

--The integration of women and African Americans into the military offers useful comparisons.

--The troops oppose repealing DADT.

--DADT is a losing issue politically.

more here:
http://www.dws/dn/opinion/viewpoints.html (http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/opinion/viewpoints/stories/DN-belkin_21edi.State.Edition1.cd57db.html)
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: BayCityJohn on September 21, 2010, 01:53:56 PM
DADT Repeal Fails in Senate

http://advocate.com/News/Daily_News/2010/09/21/DADT_Repeal_Fails_in_Senate/ (http://advocate.com/News/Daily_News/2010/09/21/DADT_Repeal_Fails_in_Senate/)
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: garyd on September 21, 2010, 02:38:05 PM
Here is another source on the same story.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704129204575505742224737582.html?mod=djemalertNEWS (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704129204575505742224737582.html?mod=djemalertNEWS)

Interesting how the slightest nuance in writing can change meaning.
The "Advocate" ssems to indicate the the Bill was voted down because Republicans wanted to debate the DADT issue.
The WSJ report indicates that there were other issues in play as well.


Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: BayCityJohn on September 21, 2010, 02:48:18 PM
The WSJ report indicates that there were other issues in play as well.

right.  I'll bet a lot of republicans and christians are already lobbying to make today a national holiday.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on September 21, 2010, 05:30:37 PM
Here is another source on the same story.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704129204575505742224737582.html?mod=djemalertNEWS (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704129204575505742224737582.html?mod=djemalertNEWS)

Interesting how the slightest nuance in writing can change meaning.
The "Advocate" ssems to indicate the the Bill was voted down because Republicans wanted to debate the DADT issue.
The WSJ report indicates that there were other issues in play as well.

There's always OTHER issues, but are you telling me that if the DADT part of this bill wasn't in there
that any of this other crap would've happened?  I doubt we'd even know the bill was being voted on
if DADT weren't in it today.

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: garyd on September 21, 2010, 06:00:39 PM
but are you telling me that if the DADT part of this bill wasn't in there
that any of this other crap would've happened? 


Nah, I'm not saying that at all.  Quite frankly, initially all I was doing was remarking on the reporting styles of two very different "news" publications. 
However, I am also just cynical enough (who told  ;)) to believe that the timing of this thing stinks to the high heavens.
I believe neither side wanted this thing to pass so they could both go into the Fall election cycle with ammunition to lob at one another.
The Republicans will say the Dems are ignoring the needs of our valiant troops just so they can push their liberal social agendas down our throats.
The Democrats will say the Reps are ignoring the needs of our valiant troops because they are homophobic, intolerant, assholes.

Both sides view the American voter with a cynical sense of disdain and as willing to believe any nonsense they throw at us.
In other words, we are stupid.
Sometimes I think the evidence is on their side.  :(
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: lislis on September 25, 2010, 04:06:57 AM
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2012990601_leightonstatement25m.html

After ruling that retired Major Margaret Witt, a lesbian Air Force Reserve officer, should be reinstated to her unit, U.S. District Court Judge Ronald Leighton on Friday made the following comments from the bench
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: tfferg on October 04, 2010, 01:47:14 AM

British army claims having openly gay soldiers has 'increased productivity'


http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2010/09/29/british-army-claims-having-openly-gay-soliders-hasincreased-productivity/ (http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2010/09/29/british-army-claims-having-openly-gay-soliders-hasincreased-productivity/)
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on October 04, 2010, 03:06:00 PM
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Yay!  Another study for our Senators to ignore!
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on October 12, 2010, 04:57:24 PM
Breaking News: Judge orders halt to DADT discharges
10/14/2010
by Lisa Keen

A federal judge in California Tuesday issued an order to put an "immediate" and global halt to all discharges and investigations under the military's "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy.

Federal District Court Judge Virginia Phillips surprised many October 12 when she issued the injunction, because the U.S. Department of Justice had urged her to limit any enforcement of her decision until after Congress has had a chance to consider repeal of the federal law this fall.

A spokesperson for DOJ said attorneys are "reviewing the ruling" and would have no immediate comment.

But it is the type of injunction DOJ is almost certain to appeal immediately, especially given that there is still some hope that the Senate will take up repeal language on DADT after Congress returns from the midterm elections. The House has already approved repeal language, but Republicans in the Senate filibustered a defense spending bill last month in part because of opposition to beginning the repeal process now, before a Pentagon report is released in December.

The three-page injunction, filed October 12, reiterates Phillips's ruling in September that DADT is unconstitutional. The order "permanently enjoins" the U.S. and the Department of Defense from "implementing regulations against any person under their jurisdiction or command."

The injunction also calls for an immediate suspension of "investigation, discharge, separation, or other proceeding" under the law.


http://ebar.com/news/article.php?sec=news&article=5145
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on October 12, 2010, 05:28:04 PM
Breaking News: Judge orders halt to DADT discharges
10/14/2010
by Lisa Keen

Wow, that IS breaking news -- two days early!
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: estefue on October 15, 2010, 09:14:15 AM
Although it looks the appeal is happening.. No surprise there. The disappointment continues.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: tfferg on October 21, 2010, 09:49:39 PM

In a substantial article, a member of the Australian Defence Force argues that the Australia, as a US ally whose military fights alongside US forces in Afghanistan and under joint command structures, should communicate our disagreement with Don't Ask, Don't Tell.

Sex, guns and human rights
By Raphael de Vietri - posted Friday, 22 October 2010

http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=11130&page=0 (http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=11130&page=0)

Some highlights:

Australia is not immune from criticism on this issue. Both Australia (until 1992) and the UK (until 2000) have had bans on homosexual people serving in their forces. But our forces, and our societies more generally, have moved on from those darker days. Looking back we realise how medieval and cruel our attitudes were.

The idea of the "fair go" is now of central importance to Australian Army values. Its soldiers are directed to observe the "Rules for a Fair Go", which are issued to every solider in the form of a wallet size card:
•   Be honest, always.
•   Respect the differences in others.
•   Make the Chain of Command work.
•   Use the military justice system.
•   Bring honour to your country, the Army, your mates and yourself.
•   Respect and use the Army values of: Courage, Initiative, and Teamwork.
•   Earn the trust and loyalty of your team. Don't let your mates down.
•   Be accountable for you actions and decisions.
•   Treat others as you want them to treat you.
•   Lead by example.
•   Have courage to stand up for what is right and stop unacceptable behaviour.

This message is reinforced to all soldiers and officers at compulsory Equity and Diversity training courses. The progress made by the ADF in the area of Equity and Diversity is impressive, even by civilian standards. Each unit, for example, now has a designated Equity Officer as a first step for complaints management.

When Lt-Gen Cosgrove (then Chief of Army) announced the Fair Go Hotline, for matters not resolved by the chain of command, he said of these values:

"I do not see these matters as being irrelevant or as a side issue to what we in the Army are all about but, rather, I am convinced they make a significant contribution to our operational capability and effectiveness… Unacceptable behaviour, particularly bullying and harassment, adversely impacts on morale, health and individual and unit effectiveness."

[Peter Cosgrove is widely and highly respected. He was the leader of the Australian military in the international InterFET force which intervened in EastTimor in 1999 to protect the people from the savage revenge of the Indonesian army and militias after the Maubere people voted overwhelmingly for independence. I saw first hand  how Australian soldiers are dearly beloved of Maubere.]

But this issue is about more than just our American friends' disregard for the "fair go". This is an institutionalised disregard for fundamental human rights....


Australia's political and military leaders ought to be unambiguous about where Australia stands on this [Don't Ask, Don't Tell] policy. Although a public denouncement of the policy by Australia's Ambassador in Washington is unlikely to move those who are now blocking progress, it is important for us, as friends of America, to put our disagreement on the record...

Even if you disagree with the discriminatory policy, at this point you might be thinking, "whoah just hang on", why should Australia risk its primary strategic alliance for the sake of a few confused "fags"?

The answer comes in the form of a well-worn (but true) cliché: It's a matter of principle. The brazen hypocrisy involved on the part of the US military has become ridiculous. The misery which some closeted homosexual soldiers in the US forces must go through is comparable to the pain caused to some women who were oppressed and suffered under the Taliban in Afghanistan. Why should closeted soldiers be fighting for the rights and freedoms of foreigners, when their own country does not even afford them those same rights and freedoms?

Closeted societies are unhealthy and destructive. Anyone who has seen Brokeback Mountain would understand the… wait…. I can hear Miss Palin interrupting with her chirpy tea-party smile: "Son! We ain't gonna lynch em! We just gonna fire em!" Ok Sarah, you're right, lynching is extreme, but firing a man or woman because of the person they love still seems pretty cruel to me...

...for us to know that our US pals are responsible for needless institutionalised discrimination, and to not do anything about it, is in fact more than just embarrassing. It's gutless. Frank friends are fine friends. And the bottom line is, it's not worth freeing strangers if you are a prisoner in your own country.




Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on October 22, 2010, 04:24:16 PM
I'm glad to learn that the Notre Dame Gay Alumni group, of which I'm now a member, recently gave an award to fellow alum LtCol Victor Fehrenbach of the Air Force, who is fighting his discharge under DADT.

http://www.ndsmcobserver.com/news/gay-alumni-group-to-present-awards-1.1660095

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Melisande on October 25, 2010, 09:07:49 AM

I think how the President and Pentagon and Congress are currently
handling DADT and the judicial pronouncements is tantamount to gay bashing.

Absolutely, Lyle!

The US officials' insistence on the need for careful preparation for the change and re-training of the military to implement reform sounds quite incredible, unless the fear and hatred of homosexual people is deeply ingrained in the ranks and among officers. Perhaps it is more widespread if documentaries I've seen about the extent of Christianist evangelization in the US army are anything to go by. OTOH, a report of Aljazeera English News yesterday said that for most young recruits, openly gay people are not an issue as so many young people have grown up having openly gay contemporaries.

I don't recall any talk of special planning and re-training when policy was changed to allow out homosexual people to serve in the Australian armed forces. I've never heard of any subsequent problems. In fact, the only problems I've heard of are occasional incidents of harassment of women.


I knew this, but on PBS's news hour tonight they had a journalist
discussing what's been happening here and he pointed out that way back in 1993
the Rand Corporation layed out a detailed opinion that if the policy were to be
gotten rid of, the implementation should be immediate and decisive.  Don't turn
it into a "taffy pull" is the term he used.  He said that is what's happening now and
that it's causing people to start entrenching their own ideas about it which is causing
problems when if it had just been "decisively" done, these EXTRA problems would not
be occurring.  Problems like the judge ordering it dismantled so that gay
soldiers were coming in to enlist and then the next day there's a stay and now
they won't be allowed to.  But maybe next week.  It's insane!  A taffy pull.
I mean, since when does the military need to be so touchy feely with everyone
about this--ORDER IT DONE.  It's really insane the way this has played out.
There were two or three websites that set up immediately when the policy was briefly
void to detail all the "harm or disruption" it would cause (according to the stay that
was asked for) if not handled in a timely manner and ALL of the websites reported
ZERO things happened.  Nada.  Nothing.


As a veteran, I can tell you what bullshit the alleged controversy over DADT is.  There is no other issue in the history of military activity in the US where servicemen/women have ever been asked for their opinion, and they have certainly never guided any military rule of conduct.  The rules are the rules and you will be punished for infractions: grunts, non-coms, and officers alike do what they are told to do.  When President Truman racially integrated the services, no one was asked if they wanted the change, no matter how badly their belief system was screwed-up, and those who couldn't/didn't live up to the rule did time in the brig and/or were discharged under other than honorable conditions.  Period.


*mod note: moved from Gay Bashing thread*
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on October 25, 2010, 02:00:41 PM
The Washington Times disgusting editorial:

EDITORIAL: Queer eye for the G.I.
Pentagon mobilizes effort to endorse homosexual conduct
 
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/oct/22/queer-eye-for-the-gi/

One part:

Quote
The destructive force unleashed by the Pentagon's collaboration with the leftist agenda is apparent from the circus created when homosexual activists like Dan Choi sashayed over to the Times Square recruiting center to make a political point in the short period in which the Phillips order was effective. Leftists are only interested in political points and symbolism here. Providing defense to the nation in the most effective way possible is the furthest thing from their mind. Treating military recruitment primarily as a diversity issue opens up a closet full of absurdities. On what basis, then, would the military discriminate against the elderly? Why can't grandpa become a paratrooper? Should the military not reject someone merely because he is handicapped? Why not a wheelchair-bound infantryman?

And a nice rebuttal from the Washington Post:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2010/10/the_washington_times_disgustin.html

The last line:
Quote
There's no response to that, other than disgust.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fofol on October 26, 2010, 06:13:47 AM
Some details from the Idaho Statesman as to how LtCol Fehrenbach came to be outed in the first place.

http://www.idahostatesman.com/2009/08/23/874410/gay-boise-air-force-pilot-outed.html



   'unfortunately we are unable to locate the page you have requested'
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on October 26, 2010, 11:33:46 AM
 White House threatens gay orgs before key DADT meeting -
don't mention DADT court cases or meeting is over

by John Aravosis (DC)
10/26/2010 12:03:00 PM

Quote
So much for that "charm offensive." I guess in the Obama administration, threatening your allies is about as charming as it gets.


Kerry Eleveld at the Advocate has obtained a White House email to gay organizations participating in today's high-level DADT summit at the White House.  The summit was hastily called as part of the White House's larger "charm offensive" to woo the left pre next week's elections.

In the email, the White House liaison to the gay community, Brian Bond, outright threatened our key national organizations that if any of them dare mention the DADT court cases - the ones the Obama administration keeps defending and appealing, even though they don't have to - the White House will immediately end the meeting.
Charming.

http://www.americablog.com/2010/10/white-house-threatens-gay-orgs-before.html
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on October 26, 2010, 05:05:25 PM
   'unfortunately we are unable to locate the page you have requested'

Some of the local coverage articles about him can be found here:

http://boise.planetdiscover.com/sp?skin=&aff=1100&keywords=Victor+Fehrenbach&submit=SEARCH

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: tfferg on October 27, 2010, 07:00:26 AM
I see South Korean military bigwigs seem to be as irrational as their US counterparts

Army gay rules breach rights:  S Korea commission

•   Published: 27/10/2010 at 11:59 AM
•   Online news: Asia
South Korea's military criminal code punishing homosexuality in the ranks is a violation of soldiers' rights, the country's human rights commission said.
 
(snip)
Under the current code, homosexuality among servicemen is punishable by up to one year in jail. The constitutional court is reviewing the issue following a request from a military court.

The rights commission met this week to agree a position to deliver to the court next month. It said its majority opinion is that the law infringes gay soldiers' rights to equality, privacy and to choose a sexual preference.

"Homosexuality does not directly weaken combat capability, morale or unity," the rights panel said in a report.

"Punishment by the military criminal law is against the current of the times because it infringes upon (soldiers) rights to equality."

There were 176 homosexuality cases in the military from 2004-2007 and three male soldiers were convicted, it said.

"In other countries, there are no instances of a gay soldier being punished for homosexuality in the military," Yoon Seol-Ah, an official of the rights panel, was quoted by Yonhap news agency as saying.

"In countries like Canada, Australia and Israel, openly gay soldiers are also allowed to enlist for military service."

Military officials argue that South Korea is different from such countries because it has a mainly conscript military of 655,000.

All physically and mentally fit men are liable to serve at least two years in the military, which faces off against North Korea across the border.

Homosexuality is not a crime under the civilian legal code.

http://www.bangkokpost.com/news/asia/203434/army-gay-rules-breach-rights-s-korea-commission (http://www.bangkokpost.com/news/asia/203434/army-gay-rules-breach-rights-s-korea-commission)
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Sandy on October 28, 2010, 08:40:08 AM
Israel has an all-conscript army, so I don't see how Korea is any different.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on October 29, 2010, 05:46:25 PM
From the "duh" department:

DADT survey leak: It’s not a big deal
October 29, 2010

From the Huffington Post:
An internal Pentagon study has found that most U.S. troops and their families don’t care whether gays are allowed to serve openly and think the policy of “don’t ask, don’t tell” could be done away with, according to officials familiar with its findings.

NBC News’ Richard Engel discussed more of the findings and the implications Thursday evening on “The Rachel Maddow Show.”

Stay tuned. The Pentagon will not discuss the findings until December. That’s when the agency will detail its own plan for repeal of the 1993 law.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/10/28/gay-military-acceptance-m_n_775753.html

Oh, but those military chaplains:

Retired Chaplains Come Out Against DADT Repeal, Citing 'Religious Bigotry Freedom

(forgetting perhaps that you can choose your religion, but not your orientation
and that many were against integration of the armed forces or women serving as
well, but that's never stopped them before I guess...must be so hard to be against
things all of the time instead of for something.)

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/10/29/retired-chaplains-oppose-dadt-repeal_n_776355.html
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on October 29, 2010, 05:50:41 PM
Except.....how does repeal of DADT affect retired chaplains? ???

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on October 31, 2010, 01:46:50 PM
Quote
Under guidelines set by the Pentagon, U.S. military commanders in Iraq are censoring the Courage Campaign's web site -- and preventing soldiers from accessing our Progressive Voter Guide before Election Day.

It gets much worse. According to an urgent email we received from an American voter (whose identity we are protecting) on a military base in Iraq, access to our web site and voter guide have been denied to soldiers -- but right-wing sites like the Tea Party Express and National Organization for Marriage are accessible.

We immediately filed a formal complaint with the Pentagon, President Obama and several members of Congress. But the Pentagon punted the issue to military commanders on the ground in Iraq, who are charged with the responsibility of determining which sites servicemembers are allowed to visit.

With Tuesday's election looming and our troops filling out ballots in Iraq, we are going to stop at nothing to make the site -- and our voter guide -- accessible to American soldiers who want to vote.

That's why we're fighting back against the Pentagon's censorship of our website by putting the Progressive Voter Guide on Facebook today. We're going around the military, but we need your help to do it. The easiest way to spread the word is to simply "LIKE" Courage on Facebook right now.

www.couragecampaign.org
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on November 04, 2010, 01:23:27 PM

The 2010 elections and 'don't ask, don't tell'

Quote
An interesting outcome of the Republican tsunami is that two men on opposite sides of the debate over repeal of the ban on gay men and lesbians serving openly in the military went down in defeat. Rep. Patrick Murphy (D-Pa.), the straight Iraq War vet elected in 2006, wore out the soles of his shoes working the halls of the House to secure the votes need to repeal 'don't ask don't tell.' Rep. Ike Skelton (D-Mo.), chairman of the House armed services committee who has been in Congress since 1977, was against lifting the ban on gay men and lesbians serving openly in the military.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/postpartisan/2010/11/the_mid-terms_and_dont_ask_don.html

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on November 04, 2010, 01:26:30 PM
Groups Want Vote On DADT During Lame-Duck
 Geoff Holtzman |  Thursday, November 4, 2010

Quote
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) should schedule a vote on a measure to repeal the military’s “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy as soon as Congress reconvenes, said a group of pro-gay advocates on Thursday.

Servicemembers United, an interest group representing gay and lesbian troops and veterans, released a statement urging the newly-reelected Reid to work quickly on a repeal of DADT, which is included in this year’s defense spending bill.

“The path to getting defense authorization and ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ wrapped up this year is narrow, but that path is also crystal clear,” said Servicemembers United Executive Director Alexander Nicholson. “There is neither time nor any good reason to delay bringing the authorization bill back up for reconsideration, and the first concrete action on the bill absolutely must occur before the Senate’s Thanksgiving recess.”

Reid’s initial attempt to file cloture on DADT failed back in August. Now, with Republicans poised to add to their minority in the Senate come January, the Democrats’ window of opportunity to act is diminishing rapidly. Reid said yesterday that he would prefer to vote on DADT before the end of the year, but hedged a little, reminding reporters that the Senate’s calendar will be busy during the brief session.

“The problem we have with the defense aurhorization bill is that it takes a while to get done,” he said.

On December 1, the Pentagon will submit its year-long review of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” which is expected to serve as a guide for legislative action. During a news conference at the White House on Wednesday, Obama said the report “will give us time to act, potentially, during the lame-duck session to change this policy.”

http://www.talkradionews.com/news/2010/11/4/group-wants-vote-on-dadt-during-lame-duck.html

"Potentially?"

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fofol on November 04, 2010, 02:05:56 PM
   Among the least respectable people on the planet are military chaplains, especially any who are affiliated with any allegedly 'Christian' organization.  Seriously, what part of Thou shalt not kill do they not get?  Since they can chose to circumvent what they identify as the word of God, they can come out (you should forgive the usage) against Love thy neighbor, too.  Who is my neighbor?  All(men) are your neighbors, said Jesus.  They are hypocrites from core to rind.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Dave Cullen on November 12, 2010, 06:40:13 PM
So much breaking on this story.

I wrote about it today:

http://www.davecullenblog.com/2010/11/pentagon-group-finds-there-is-minimal.html

I'm on the run, but will return to discuss.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on November 12, 2010, 08:06:13 PM
Neat opinion piece by Richard Cohen of the WP:

Quote
The Marines need one good man. That would be a commandant who sees his job as implementing the end of "don't ask, don't tell" and integrating openly homosexual men and women into the Corps. As it is, the current commandant, Gen. James Amos, has indicated he is not up to the job. He is thoroughly befuddled. He can't distinguish between a gay man and a sexual predator.

In the general's telling, the coming end of this discriminatory policy could produce sexual havoc in our nation's barracks and battlefields. The Marines have a mission. They have to consider unit cohesion. There's a war one -- actually two, come to think of it, not mention providing guards at countless embassies abroad. What if the Marine in front of, say, the embassy in Paris was gay? I shudder. What about London. I shudder some more.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/postpartisan/2010/11/dont_ask_dont_tell_and_the_mar.html


Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: tfferg on November 12, 2010, 11:59:26 PM
It would be funny if it didn't have such tragic consequences.

The old fogeys, retired, or in positions of command are the ones with the problem. Why don't these officers take heed of the positive or neutral responses of serving troops to the Pentagon's survey? Why don't they learn from the officers of allied armies where gays and lesbians serve openly? They're in the same wars in at least two countries.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on November 13, 2010, 05:52:46 AM
When reality meets prejudices, guess what wins.

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on November 13, 2010, 01:42:13 PM

As for Marine General James Amos, because he has put his negativity over this issue out there previously, I would assume that has given some cover to others in that branch of Service to be more vocal about their dislike.  On PBS last night, one person surmised that the Gen. had gotten wind or some word of the results that it was no big deal to most of the military so he decided to come out and stir up some negativity.  This is what happens when you ASK military people their opinions instead of giving the order and having them follow it.  And by the way, the reporters have said that the DADT question of repeal is the most troublesome to the Marine Corps only, in the results, and that is a 40% disapproval.  That means 60% are not having any trouble with that.  We've only elected a couple Presidents with 60% of the vote.  So, the press is really making a big deal of this again because they like the controversy of it.

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Dave Cullen on November 18, 2010, 03:45:46 PM
the marine general pissed me off. but i guess they're not all going to go down quietly.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: BayCityJohn on November 18, 2010, 07:03:57 PM
EDITORIAL: Barack's Brokeback barracks
Leaked 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' details pervert Pentagon study
By THE WASHINGTON TIMES


President Obama and his friends in the media want the public to think Americans serving in uniform are just fine and dandy with homosexual conduct in the military. This view is being spread through a series of selective leaks from the Pentagon's Comprehensive Review Working Group, which is putting the finishing touches on a report regarding the future of the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy.

Mr. Obama has promised the fringe special-interest activists who helped him win the 2008 election that he will deliver what for them is the symbolic victory of opening barracks to lesbians, gays, bisexuals and the transgendered (LGBT). Last week, the Supreme Court rejected an attempt to use the courts to bypass the legislative process to implement this radical change. After the big GOP win in the elections, ramming the LGBT priority through the lame-duck Congress appears to be the sole remaining option - and an unlikely one at that.



full article:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/nov/18/baracks-brokeback-barracks/ (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/nov/18/baracks-brokeback-barracks/)
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Dave Cullen on November 18, 2010, 10:08:41 PM
This is a little scary, though quite possibly chicken-littleish:

http://motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2010/11/war-against-dadt-repeal

I do believe they are right that the big opposition will come from the Marines, though, and second from the Air Force, which has long been most hostile to gays.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fofol on November 19, 2010, 06:41:02 AM
This is a little scary, though quite possibly chicken-littleish:

http://motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2010/11/war-against-dadt-repeal

I do believe they are right that the big opposition will come from the Marines, though, and second from the Air Force, which has long been most hostile to gays.

   ???  This is so strange, being the opposite of what my experience tells me: as a veteran (Army), I can tell you that in RL, most vocal gay enlistees choose the Air Force, and having lived in pre-AIDS southern CA, near Camp Pendleton (Marine base), I'm living proof that Marines are some of the hottest sex around (twenty years later, I'm still smiling...) - maybe the brass is just pissed coz they can't sneak off for a round or two of m2m...or still pissed for not having the 'nads to do it.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on November 19, 2010, 11:39:14 AM
EDITORIAL: Barack's Brokeback barracks
Leaked 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' details pervert Pentagon study
By THE WASHINGTON TIMES

President Obama and his friends in the media want the public to think Americans serving in uniform are just fine and dandy with homosexual conduct in the military.

Whoever wrote this opinion piece (always anonymously) has it wrong right from that very first line.
And if the author knew anything about BBM, he'd know that DADT "is" currently fostering Brokeback
Barracks, places where people aren't allowed to be themselves, have to hide and/or feel ashamed and
live in the closet.  Just goes to show you how small minded many people are.  Reading the comments
on these editorials is quite dehumanizing, too, and I don't recommend it.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fofol on November 19, 2010, 01:29:54 PM
As for Marine General James Amos, because he has put his negativity over this issue out there previously, I would assume that has given some cover to others in that branch of Service to be more vocal about their dislike.  On PBS last night, one person surmised that the Gen. had gotten wind or some word of the results that it was no big deal to most of the military so he decided to come out and stir up some negativity.  This is what happens when you ASK military people their opinions instead of giving the order and having them follow it.  And by the way, the reporters have said that the DADT question of repeal is the most troublesome to the Marine Corps only, in the results, and that is a 40% disapproval.  That means 60% are not having any trouble with that.  We've only elected a couple Presidents with 60% of the vote.  So, the press is really making a big deal of this again because they like the controversy of it.



   Controversy draws attention, sells more papers, ad revenue goes up with the increased circulation.  The bastards.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on November 28, 2010, 02:31:43 PM
Judge: American GIs should "convert" Lesbians
by Tully
Saturday, November 27, 2010

http://www.nolanchart.com/article8166.html

Quote
And just when I thought I couldn't possibly read or hear anything worse than I've already heard...along comes Hamilton County (TN) magistrate Joseph Rehyansky. Writing in a column for the "Daily Caller" titled, "Don't hint, Don't wink: An Immodest Proposal," Reyhansky argued for the inclusion of lesbians in the military, but the exclusion of gay men. His 'reasoning' (I shudder to even use that word) sets a new low in the conversation on Don't Ask Don't Tell...and is nothing short of horrifying coming from the pen (it wasn't even a verbal slip) of a man who is a Judge.

Regarding lesbians in military service, Rehyansky wrote, "...it is an open secret that they [lesbians] do well in the calling, especially in medical and administrative specialties. I am certain that I knew some during my 20 years in the Army, although I didn't ask and they didn't tell..." But then he offered his final solution to the 'problem' of having these positive public servants: "...My solution would get the distaff part of our homosexual population off our collective Broke Back,' thus giving straight male GIs a fair shot at converting lesbians and bringing them into the mainstream."

In other words, if we can stop all those gay men from whining about equality, we can let our red-blooded straight American Soldiers screw all those confused lesbians straight.

Corrective rape.

In the original article from which this one was written, a commenter wrote:

It’s even funnier [the article] when you know that this proudly archaic curmudgeon was fired for making inappropriate comments of a sexual nature… to a prisoner… while serving as a magistrate.  I guess he just assumes that everyone is as tempted to abuse their power for sexual gain as he is.


Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on November 28, 2010, 02:36:01 PM

Troops Buck Historical Trend by Saying Gays OK
by Anne Flaherty
The Associated Press
Saturday, November 27, 2010

Quote
WASHINGTON -- When a majority of troops told the Pentagon this summer they didn't care if gays were allowed to serve openly in the military, it was in sharp contrast to the time when America's fighting forces voiced bitter opposition to accepting racial minorities and women in the services.  The survey, due out Tuesday, is expected to find pockets of resistance among combat troops to ending the ban on gays. But some 70 percent of respondents were expected to say that lifting the ban would have a positive or mixed effect, or none at all, according to officials familiar with the findings.

The study is expected to set the stage for a showdown in the Senate between advocates of repealing the 17-year-old "don't ask, don't tell" law and a small but powerful group of foes in the final days of the lame-duck Congress.

Repeal would mean that, for the first time in U.S. history, gays would be openly accepted by the military and could acknowledge their sexual orientation without fear of being kicked out.

U.S. troops haven't always been so accepting. Troop surveys conducted throughout the 1940s on blacks and Jews, and in the 1970s and 1980s on women, exposed deep rifts within a military that was dominated by white males but becoming increasingly reliant on minorities to help do its job.

In a study from July 1947, four of five enlisted men told the Army that they would oppose blacks serving in their units even if whites and blacks didn't share housing or food facilities.

The same study also revealed a deep resentment toward Jews. Most enlisted men said Jews had profited greatly from the war and many doubted that Jews had suffered under Adolf Hitler.

More here:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/27/AR2010112701234.html

We know that there was opposition to both blacks and women being integrated into the military, but the level of opposition might come as a surprise to us.  Yet, in the face of that, we had leaders who did the right thing and forged ahead.  With majorities of survey respondents wanting DADT repealed (even among Republicans and conservatives alone) and an unprecedented survey of the troops showing 70% on board (a far cry from 1 in 5 in 1947 that was okay with admitting racial minorities) will this Congress be held hostage to that small but powerful group of foes or will they be exposed as fauxs and the right thing happen again?  Based on recent history of doing nothing, more than doing the wrong thing, I cannot be that optimistic, but so many things that were fought about and wrong and now seem so obvious have, in fact, changed at some point, so we shall see.  McCain ran on "Country First" not "Country Club First."


Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: BayCityJohn on November 28, 2010, 02:55:14 PM
Quote
will this Congress be held hostage to that small but powerful group of foes


probably
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: BayCityJohn on November 29, 2010, 09:51:28 AM
DADT Commentary Suggests Corrective Rape for Lesbians

Gay men should not be allowed to serve openly in the military, but lesbians should be welcome because it would give straight male soldiers a chance to “convert” them, suggested a former Tennessee official in an online commentary.

According to The Raw Story, Joe Rehyansky posted his commentary last week on The Daily Caller, a right wing website. The site has since removed the part of the article that pertained to lesbian service members.

“In the original article, Rehyansky concluded that his lesbians-only policy ‘would get the distaff part of our homosexual population off our collective ‘Broke Back,’ thus giving straight male GIs a fair shot at converting lesbians and bringing them into the mainstream,” he said.


http://advocate.com/News/Daily_News/2010/11/29/DADT_Commentary_Suggests_Corrective_Rape_for_Lesbians/ (http://advocate.com/News/Daily_News/2010/11/29/DADT_Commentary_Suggests_Corrective_Rape_for_Lesbians/)
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fofol on November 30, 2010, 09:33:21 AM
Whatever the outcome of the congressionals, this fact, from CNN 11/30, is an incredible improvement:

A Pew survey released Monday indicated that a majority of Americans say they favor allowing gays and lesbians to serve openly in the armed forces.

According to the poll, 58 percent of the public approves of allowing homosexuals to serve openly, with 27 percent saying they are opposed.

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Dave Cullen on November 30, 2010, 12:25:27 PM
The report is out. Sec. Gates is on TV backing repeal by the Senate this month.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Sandy on November 30, 2010, 12:27:43 PM
From his lips to god's ears.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fofol on November 30, 2010, 05:53:15 PM
  A realy pleasant jolt to hear Secretary Gates end the don't worry boys, nothing bad's gonna happen speech with, 'those who do have objections will have to remember that they are in the military and will follow orders.'
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on November 30, 2010, 08:15:58 PM
About time.

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Sandy on December 01, 2010, 09:22:40 AM
I'm glad to see that one of the recommendations was to allow former members kicked out under DADT to re-accession.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Dave Cullen on December 01, 2010, 03:30:40 PM
i'm still reading the report. very impressive.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on December 01, 2010, 05:11:04 PM
i'm still reading the report. very impressive.

Do you have a link to it?  For some reason, I am only finding excerpt links.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Marge_Innavera on December 02, 2010, 08:41:53 AM
I get e-newsletters from a number of whacko right-wing groups, but this one has a new wrinkle. Apparently at least one group is trying to use the DADT issue as a cash cow.

The email, an appeal to stop the repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell, came from a website called  "Pray In Jesus' Name". (http://www.prayinjesusname.org) I went to the site, as sometimes you're allowed to add your own comments to these petitions.   

I was redirected to a no-nonsense page that asked for not only name and email but "billing address", followed by directions for submitting your credit card number.  Such a deal!  Here's part of the page:


Please sign, submit, and WE WILL FAX your petition automatically to ALL 535 MEMBERS of the House and Senate right away (saving you hours of labor)!

Please Click Here to Preview Your Personalized Petition
to ALL 100 Senators and ALL 435 Congressmen, to Keep
"Don't Ask, Don't Tell" and protect our troops lives.

$17 to fax 17 key undecided swing-vote Senators

$29 to fax all 100 Senators

$55 to fax all 174 GOP U.S. Representatives

$59 to fax all 261 Democrat/Independent U.S. Representatives

$99 to fax all 435 members of Congress (BEST VALUE)

$119 to fax all 435 members of Congress and all 100 Senators (BIGGEST IMPACT)


The site is hosted by "Chaplain Gordon James Klingenschmitt", who apparently had to resign as a military chaplain 3 years ago for refusing to use nonsectarian prayers.

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Dave Cullen on December 02, 2010, 10:10:18 AM
Do you have a link to it?  For some reason, I am only finding excerpt links.


sorry. full report here:

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/politics/20101130-military/DADTReport.pdf
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: atruant on December 02, 2010, 04:05:31 PM
Looks like good progress here, folks. Hope the trend continues!!

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/12/02/mullen-troops-balk-change-gay-service-policy-job/
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on December 02, 2010, 11:48:40 PM
Listening to some of the Republican Senators talking about DADT is akin
to eating castoroil.  They make you want to slug them.  Below is a link to what
Sen. Saxby Chambliss (R) from Georgia and Lieberman were saying on PBS's Newshour.

Aside from things these people say that reporters don't call them on...this exchange
was even more maddening:

JIM LEHRER:  Why is it, Senator Chambliss -- I want to ask you the same thing, Senator Lieberman -- that this thing has fallen strictly along party lines? What is it, the difference between Democrats and Republicans on don't ask, don't tell that is so rigid between the two parties?

Senator Chambliss first.

SEN. SAXBY CHAMBLISS: Yes, I don't know that I can specifically say, Jim, why it's a Democrat/Republican issue.

But, certainly, you are right. I don't think, by any means, there's any difference in morality or whatever level you try to look at this on between Democrats and Republicans. But this just happens to be something that we feel very strongly about. The constituency that comes from the gay community, I think, historically is Democratic, and that may be part of it.

I don't know, although I have got a lot of friends who are members of the gay community. And they're good people. And we have good working relationships, as well as good friendships. So, it's not a Republican issue to me. Joe's exactly right. In my mind, it's an issue of national security. It just happens to be one where Republicans and Democrats disagree.


Yeah.

Right.

"I don't know why we disagree."  He has no freakin idea?
I don't know why I don't want black people integrated into the U.S. military
or women to have the right to vote.  Surely it's not because of any moral
differences and we just happen to feel strongly about this issue.  And it's
a national security issue because WHY, Senator Chambliss?  The same
Senator who's against gay adoptions in D.C. and who last Sept. defended
someone in his office who posted hate speech on the JoeMyGod website about gays
by saying, "Maybe the employee was gay and was just trying to deflect that
knowledge."  Oh, some of Mr. Chambliss' best friends are gay, he says.  He
has alot of gay friends!  They love him!  And historically gay people are members
of the democratic party because of National Security issues?  Or he doesn't get
why?  What a load of crap coming out of the mouths of senators and no one
asks the hard questions of them when it starts drooling out of their orifices. 

 Transcript of pBS segment:
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/military/july-dec10/dadt_12-02.html

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fofol on December 03, 2010, 06:15:21 AM
In response to the 'sharing the shower' issue as the hearings continue, don't the top brass understand that about 58% of the country will see them as disgraceful whiney-ass crybabies standing up in front of the country and essentially saying that our troops are so unable to handle reality that they're neurotic about other men looking at their bums and pee-pees?  As if.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fofol on December 03, 2010, 10:09:54 AM
Listening to some of the Republican Senators talking about DADT is akin
to eating castoroil.  They make you want to slug them.  Below is a link to what
Sen. Saxby Chambliss (R) from Georgia and Lieberman were saying on PBS's Newshour.

Aside from things these people say that reporters don't call them on...this exchange
was even more maddening:

JIM LEHRER:  Why is it, Senator Chambliss -- I want to ask you the same thing, Senator Lieberman -- that this thing has fallen strictly along party lines? What is it, the difference between Democrats and Republicans on don't ask, don't tell that is so rigid between the two parties?

Senator Chambliss first.

SEN. SAXBY CHAMBLISS: Yes, I don't know that I can specifically say, Jim, why it's a Democrat/Republican issue.

But, certainly, you are right. I don't think, by any means, there's any difference in morality or whatever level you try to look at this on between Democrats and Republicans. But this just happens to be something that we feel very strongly about. The constituency that comes from the gay community, I think, historically is Democratic, and that may be part of it.

I don't know, although I have got a lot of friends who are members of the gay community. And they're good people. And we have good working relationships, as well as good friendships. So, it's not a Republican issue to me. Joe's exactly right. In my mind, it's an issue of national security. It just happens to be one where Republicans and Democrats disagree.


Yeah.

Right.

"I don't know why we disagree."  He has no freakin idea?
I don't know why I don't want black people integrated into the U.S. military
or women to have the right to vote.  Surely it's not because of any moral
differences and we just happen to feel strongly about this issue.  And it's
a national security issue because WHY, Senator Chambliss?  The same
Senator who's against gay adoptions in D.C. and who last Sept. defended
someone in his office who posted hate speech on the JoeMyGod website about gays
by saying, "Maybe the employee was gay and was just trying to deflect that
knowledge."  Oh, some of Mr. Chambliss' best friends are gay, he says.  He
has alot of gay friends!  They love him!  And historically gay people are members
of the democratic party because of National Security issues?  Or he doesn't get
why?  What a load of crap coming out of the mouths of senators and no one
asks the hard questions of them when it starts drooling out of their orifices.  

 Transcript of pBS segment:
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/military/july-dec10/dadt_12-02.html




   LOL  - I don't know if this is appropriate for the thread or just makes me look stupid, but I got a shock when I took my first quick glance at this post - I had no idea that the Republicans had a Senator named Sexy Chablis.  Plus, it's very difficult to think that Jim Lehrer isn't aware that "Fears, Tears and Queers" has been the Republican warchest cry for decades, maybe even before they met up with the scum of the earth Rove.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on December 03, 2010, 02:17:01 PM
Sen Chambliss, who never served a day in the military, got elected by, among other things, impugning the patriotism of his predecessor, who lost two legs and an arm in Vietnam.

That person really makes me angry.

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: estefue on December 03, 2010, 02:56:09 PM
The whole thing is ridiculous.  As if they weren't serving already.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fofol on December 07, 2010, 01:44:30 PM
Sen Chambliss, who never served a day in the military, got elected by, among other things, impugning the patriotism of his predecessor, who lost two legs and an arm in Vietnam.

That person really makes me angry.




    Hell, these people cook and eat their own - John McCain had his patriotism challenged by his fellow Republicans when he was in the presidential race.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on December 08, 2010, 11:52:34 AM

DADT could be on the block today as Redi is calling for a vote on
the Defense Authorization Bill.  I see no reason to be optimistic.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: BayCityJohn on December 09, 2010, 02:13:45 PM
Breaking News:Senate votes to uphold ban on gays in military

http://advocate.com/News/Daily_News/2010/12/09/Senate_DADT_Vote_Fails/
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Dave Cullen on December 09, 2010, 02:47:13 PM
Breaking News:Senate votes to uphold ban on gays in military

http://advocate.com/News/Daily_News/2010/12/09/Senate_DADT_Vote_Fails/

Disgraceful. Anti-gays win again, but history will judge them severely.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: garyd on December 09, 2010, 03:09:46 PM
Truly disgraceful and while not surprised, I am ashamed to the point of being sickened.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on December 09, 2010, 03:50:51 PM

I can't tell you how bad I feel.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Dave Cullen on December 09, 2010, 04:08:15 PM
Stand-alone DADT bill proposed by Sens. Collins & Lieberman. NYT updated its lede: http://nyti.ms/emZIJG
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Dave Cullen on December 09, 2010, 04:11:19 PM
HRC now calls for Obama to block DADT with Stop-Loss order, and to stop defending it in courts.

http://bit.ly/dH5CUc
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on December 09, 2010, 04:11:48 PM
Here's the record of this ugliness:

Measure Number:  S. 3454 (National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011 )
Including the repeal of DADT


U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 111th Congress - 2nd Session
as compiled through Senate LIS by the Senate Bill Clerk under the direction of the Secretary of the Senate


Vote Summary

Question: On Cloture on the Motion to Proceed (Upon Reconsideration, Motion to Invoke Cloture on the Motion to Proceed to S. 3454 ) 

Vote Number:  270 Vote Date:  December 9, 2010, 03:33 PM

Required For Majority:  3/5

Vote Result:  Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected


Measure Title:  An original bill to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2011 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes.

Vote Counts:
YEAs 57
NAYs 40
Not Voting 3

Alphabetical by Senator Name
Akaka (D-HI), Yea
Alexander (R-TN), Nay
Barrasso (R-WY), Nay
Baucus (D-MT), Yea
Bayh (D-IN), Yea
Begich (D-AK), Yea
Bennet (D-CO), Yea
Bennett (R-UT), Nay
Bingaman (D-NM), Yea
Bond (R-MO), Nay
Boxer (D-CA), Yea
Brown (D-OH), Yea
Brown (R-MA), Nay
Brownback (R-KS), Not Voting
Bunning (R-KY), Nay
Burr (R-NC), Nay
Cantwell (D-WA), Yea
Cardin (D-MD), Yea
Carper (D-DE), Yea
Casey (D-PA), Yea
Chambliss (R-GA), Nay
Coburn (R-OK), Nay
Cochran (R-MS), Nay
Collins (R-ME), Yea
Conrad (D-ND), Yea
Coons (D-DE), Yea
Corker (R-TN), Nay
Cornyn (R-TX), Not Voting
Crapo (R-ID), Nay
DeMint (R-SC), Nay
Dodd (D-CT), Yea
Dorgan (D-ND), Yea
Durbin (D-IL), Yea
Ensign (R-NV), Nay
 Enzi (R-WY), Nay
Feingold (D-WI), Yea
Feinstein (D-CA), Yea
Franken (D-MN), Yea
Gillibrand (D-NY), Yea
Graham (R-SC), Nay
Grassley (R-IA), Nay
Gregg (R-NH), Nay
Hagan (D-NC), Yea
Harkin (D-IA), Yea
Hatch (R-UT), Nay
Hutchison (R-TX), Nay
Inhofe (R-OK), Nay
Inouye (D-HI), Yea
Isakson (R-GA), Nay
Johanns (R-NE), Nay
Johnson (D-SD), Yea
Kerry (D-MA), Yea
Kirk (R-IL), Nay
Klobuchar (D-MN), Yea
Kohl (D-WI), Yea
Kyl (R-AZ), Nay
Landrieu (D-LA), Yea
Lautenberg (D-NJ), Yea
Leahy (D-VT), Yea
LeMieux (R-FL), Nay
Levin (D-MI), Yea
Lieberman (ID-CT), Yea
Lincoln (D-AR), Not Voting
Lugar (R-IN), Nay
Manchin (D-WV), Nay
McCain (R-AZ), Nay
McCaskill (D-MO), Yea
McConnell (R-KY), Nay
 Menendez (D-NJ), Yea
Merkley (D-OR), Yea
Mikulski (D-MD), Yea
Murkowski (R-AK), Nay
Murray (D-WA), Yea
Nelson (D-FL), Yea
Nelson (D-NE), Yea
Pryor (D-AR), Yea
Reed (D-RI), Yea
Reid (D-NV), Yea
Risch (R-ID), Nay
Roberts (R-KS), Nay
Rockefeller (D-WV), Yea
Sanders (I-VT), Yea
Schumer (D-NY), Yea
Sessions (R-AL), Nay
Shaheen (D-NH), Yea
Shelby (R-AL), Nay
Snowe (R-ME), Nay
Specter (D-PA), Yea
Stabenow (D-MI), Yea
Tester (D-MT), Yea
Thune (R-SD), Nay
Udall (D-CO), Yea
Udall (D-NM), Yea
Vitter (R-LA), Nay
Voinovich (R-OH), Nay
Warner (D-VA), Yea
Webb (D-VA), Yea
Whitehouse (D-RI), Yea
Wicker (R-MS), Nay
Wyden (D-OR), Yea
 
Grouped By Vote Position
YEAs ---57
Akaka (D-HI)
Baucus (D-MT)
Bayh (D-IN)
Begich (D-AK)
Bennet (D-CO)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Boxer (D-CA)
Brown (D-OH)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Cardin (D-MD)
Carper (D-DE)
Casey (D-PA)
Collins (R-ME)
Conrad (D-ND)
Coons (D-DE)
Dodd (D-CT)
Dorgan (D-ND)
Durbin (D-IL)
Feingold (D-WI)
 Feinstein (D-CA)
Franken (D-MN)
Gillibrand (D-NY)
Hagan (D-NC)
Harkin (D-IA)
Inouye (D-HI)
Johnson (D-SD)
Kerry (D-MA)
Klobuchar (D-MN)
Kohl (D-WI)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
Lieberman (ID-CT)
McCaskill (D-MO)
Menendez (D-NJ)
Merkley (D-OR)
Mikulski (D-MD)
 Murray (D-WA)
Nelson (D-FL)
Nelson (D-NE)
Pryor (D-AR)
Reed (D-RI)
Reid (D-NV)
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Sanders (I-VT)
Schumer (D-NY)
Shaheen (D-NH)
Specter (D-PA)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Tester (D-MT)
Udall (D-CO)
Udall (D-NM)
Warner (D-VA)
Webb (D-VA)
Whitehouse (D-RI)
Wyden (D-OR)
 
NAYs ---40
Alexander (R-TN)
Barrasso (R-WY)
Bennett (R-UT)
Bond (R-MO)
Brown (R-MA)
Bunning (R-KY)
Burr (R-NC)
Chambliss (R-GA)
Coburn (R-OK)
Cochran (R-MS)
Corker (R-TN)
Crapo (R-ID)
DeMint (R-SC)
Ensign (R-NV)
 Enzi (R-WY)
Graham (R-SC)
Grassley (R-IA)
Gregg (R-NH)
Hatch (R-UT)
Hutchison (R-TX)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Isakson (R-GA)
Johanns (R-NE)
Kirk (R-IL)
Kyl (R-AZ)
LeMieux (R-FL)
Lugar (R-IN)
Manchin (D-WV)
 McCain (R-AZ)
McConnell (R-KY)
Murkowski (R-AK)
Risch (R-ID)
Roberts (R-KS)
Sessions (R-AL)
Shelby (R-AL)
Snowe (R-ME)
Thune (R-SD)
Vitter (R-LA)
Voinovich (R-OH)
Wicker (R-MS)
 
Not Voting - 3
Brownback (R-KS)
 Cornyn (R-TX)
 Lincoln (D-AR)
 
Grouped by Home State
Alabama: Sessions (R-AL), Nay Shelby (R-AL), Nay
Alaska: Begich (D-AK), Yea Murkowski (R-AK), Nay
Arizona: Kyl (R-AZ), Nay McCain (R-AZ), Nay
Arkansas: Lincoln (D-AR), Not Voting Pryor (D-AR), Yea
California: Boxer (D-CA), Yea Feinstein (D-CA), Yea
Colorado: Bennet (D-CO), Yea Udall (D-CO), Yea
Connecticut: Dodd (D-CT), Yea Lieberman (ID-CT), Yea
Delaware: Carper (D-DE), Yea Coons (D-DE), Yea
Florida: LeMieux (R-FL), Nay Nelson (D-FL), Yea
Georgia: Chambliss (R-GA), Nay Isakson (R-GA), Nay
Hawaii: Akaka (D-HI), Yea Inouye (D-HI), Yea
Idaho: Crapo (R-ID), Nay Risch (R-ID), Nay
Illinois: Durbin (D-IL), Yea Kirk (R-IL), Nay
Indiana: Bayh (D-IN), Yea Lugar (R-IN), Nay
Iowa: Grassley (R-IA), Nay Harkin (D-IA), Yea
Kansas: Brownback (R-KS), Not Voting Roberts (R-KS), Nay
Kentucky: Bunning (R-KY), Nay McConnell (R-KY), Nay
Louisiana: Landrieu (D-LA), Yea Vitter (R-LA), Nay
Maine: Collins (R-ME), Yea Snowe (R-ME), Nay
Maryland: Cardin (D-MD), Yea Mikulski (D-MD), Yea
Massachusetts: Brown (R-MA), Nay Kerry (D-MA), Yea
Michigan: Levin (D-MI), Yea Stabenow (D-MI), Yea
Minnesota: Franken (D-MN), Yea Klobuchar (D-MN), Yea
Mississippi: Cochran (R-MS), Nay Wicker (R-MS), Nay
Missouri: Bond (R-MO), Nay McCaskill (D-MO), Yea
Montana: Baucus (D-MT), Yea Tester (D-MT), Yea
Nebraska: Johanns (R-NE), Nay Nelson (D-NE), Yea
Nevada: Ensign (R-NV), Nay Reid (D-NV), Yea
New Hampshire: Gregg (R-NH), Nay Shaheen (D-NH), Yea
New Jersey: Lautenberg (D-NJ), Yea Menendez (D-NJ), Yea
New Mexico: Bingaman (D-NM), Yea Udall (D-NM), Yea
New York: Gillibrand (D-NY), Yea Schumer (D-NY), Yea
North Carolina: Burr (R-NC), Nay Hagan (D-NC), Yea
North Dakota: Conrad (D-ND), Yea Dorgan (D-ND), Yea
Ohio: Brown (D-OH), Yea Voinovich (R-OH), Nay
Oklahoma: Coburn (R-OK), Nay Inhofe (R-OK), Nay
Oregon: Merkley (D-OR), Yea Wyden (D-OR), Yea
Pennsylvania: Casey (D-PA), Yea Specter (D-PA), Yea
Rhode Island: Reed (D-RI), Yea Whitehouse (D-RI), Yea
South Carolina: DeMint (R-SC), Nay Graham (R-SC), Nay
South Dakota: Johnson (D-SD), Yea Thune (R-SD), Nay
Tennessee: Alexander (R-TN), Nay Corker (R-TN), Nay
Texas: Cornyn (R-TX), Not Voting Hutchison (R-TX), Nay
Utah: Bennett (R-UT), Nay Hatch (R-UT), Nay
Vermont: Leahy (D-VT), Yea Sanders (I-VT), Yea
Virginia: Warner (D-VA), Yea Webb (D-VA), Yea
Washington: Cantwell (D-WA), Yea Murray (D-WA), Yea
West Virginia: Manchin (D-WV), Nay Rockefeller (D-WV), Yea
Wisconsin: Feingold (D-WI), Yea Kohl (D-WI), Yea
Wyoming: Barrasso (R-WY), Nay Enzi (R-WY), Nay

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Dave Cullen on December 09, 2010, 04:25:26 PM
Lord help me, I just retweeted Joe Lieberman. He tweeted:

@JoeLieberman: @SenatorCollins and I and others are introducing a free standing bill to repeal #DADT today.

---

FYI, You can follow the twitter conversation by tracking #DADT. It's fast and furious.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: garyd on December 09, 2010, 04:32:10 PM
HRC now calls for Obama to block DADT with Stop-Loss order, and to stop defending it in courts.

http://bit.ly/dH5CUc

I am inclined to sign this though I truly do not want this decided by the courts.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: garyd on December 09, 2010, 04:44:50 PM
FWIW. I did just send this to McCain.


For heaven's sake, Senator, try to be the leader I always assumed your were capable of being and garner the necessary support to repeal DADT. I do not live in Arizona but if I did I would have voted for you and my vote would have been to send you back to Washington not to insure that Mr. Obama is not re-elected, that is my decision, but to provide some leadership and do the work of the people. As the straight father of three straight children, one of whom is a senior officer in the military, I am ashamed to the point of being sickened by your lack of leadership regarding this issue.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: tonydude on December 09, 2010, 05:34:48 PM
 Well, both senators from Virginia voted for cloture, and that took a lot of guts.

   Meanwhile, they need to chuck aside the complaint that the combat troops tilt towards objecting.  The Prez is well know for seeking repeal, and he was greeted in Afghanistan like a rock star, during his recent visit.  I hardly think the troops bother with this issue at all.  They have fought beside other NATO troops who already have had reform.
  What bothers me on that poll of the troops, and for that matter, any other poll, is that they are horizontal.  That is, yes, no, or maybe.  They rarely delve into how deeply held the yes, no, or maybe is.  Significant numbers of the minority who objected, may have done so as a toss-off, without any real abiding problems with open integration.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on December 10, 2010, 05:01:48 PM

Today's "Truth in Humor" notice goes to this headline:

DADT NOT REPEALED
But, hey, Jim Morrison's free to go now

 - Washington Post
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on December 13, 2010, 01:43:08 PM
For Dave:

(http://www.democraticstuff.com/common/images/products/thumb/BT32824_2.jpg)

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Marge_Innavera on December 15, 2010, 08:44:31 AM
From Pam's House Blend --

"Dan Choi, who sacrificed his privacy to take on a high-profile role as one of the public faces of the impact of the discriminatory policy of Don't Ask, Don't Tell, has been hospitalized and is in the hands of professional mental health practitioners at a Veterans Administration facility. Dan explained in his email: "

Quote
I did not initially want to publicize this but I now realize it is critical for our community to know several things: veterans gay or straight carry human burdens, Activists share similar burdens, no activist should be portrayed as super human, and the failures of government and national lobbying carry consequences far beyond the careers and reputations of corporate leaders, elected officials, High powered lobbyists, or political elites. They ruin lives. My breakdown was a result of a cumulative array of stressors but there is no doubt that the composite betrayals felt on Thursday, by elected leaders and gay organizations as well as many who have exploited my name for their marketing purposes have added to the result. I am certain my experience is not an isolated incident within the gay veteran community.

At the same time, those who have been closest to me know that I truly appreciate their gracious help and mentorship. I am indebted to their hospitality and leadership.

If you could share the info and sentiment I'd be most grateful.

More, and discussion, at http://www.pamshouseblend.com/diary/18211/dan-choi-hospitalized-a-discussion-about-our-communitys-multifaceted-sacrifices
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Dave Cullen on December 18, 2010, 11:27:16 AM
IT PASSED!

With 63 votes, three more than needed!

(Final formality coming at 3 p.m., only 50 votes needed. )
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on December 18, 2010, 11:38:32 AM
Good news, Dave!
More info:

Quote
After months of fits and starts, a bill repealing "don't ask, don't tell," the ban against gays serving openly in the military, cleared its last major hurdle to passage Saturday when the Senate voted 63 to 33 to end debate on the matter.

Six Republicans -- Sens. Scott Brown of Massachusetts, Susan Collins and Olympia J. Snowe of Maine, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, Mark Kirk of Illinois, and George Voinovich of Ohio -- joined 56 Democrats in support of the measure. Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) did not vote Saturday, but released a statement saying he could not support repeal "at this time."

With the cloture vote over and the filibuster broken, the Senate will begin final debate on repealing the don't ask don't tell policy, with a final vote expected before Monday afternoon. Fifty-one votes will be needed for passage. If the Senate succeeds in passing the legislation, it will go to President Obama to be signed into law, since the House approved an identical measure last week.

But a change in the law will not automatically change the policy. Rather, the bill stipulates that the policy will only be discarded after the president, the Secretary of Defense, and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff certify that changing the law will not hurt the armed services' readiness, morale or cohesion. The Pentagon would then develop procedures for ending it altogether, a process that could take years to complete.

http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/12/18/dadt-repeal-clears-major-senate-hurdle/ (http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/12/18/dont-ask-dont-tell-repeal-clears-major-senate-hurdle/?icid=main%7Chtmlws-main-n%7Cdl1%7Csec1_lnk1%7C190742)
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Ellen (tellyouwhat) on December 18, 2010, 11:43:09 AM
I am really impressed with Henry Reid right now.  So glad to see these guys getting important work done!

I hope they keep working through Christmas.  :)
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on December 18, 2010, 11:46:26 AM

Democrat Joe Manchin of West Virgina:

Quote
As such, while I believe the DADT policy will be repealed, and probably should be repealed in the near future, I cannot support a repeal of the policy at this time.

Joe thinks it "probably" should be repealed, but had concerns so he won't vote on record.
(I don't know why he didn't vote at all, but he's acting very weaselly.)

Someone in the comment section wrote:

While the voters of West Virginia cannot undo their votes at this time,
they can remedy their mistake in the near future.

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on December 18, 2010, 12:14:32 PM
One thing we know would be different if McCain was President now.
This vote probably would never have even happened and McCain wouldn't
sign it into law even if it did.

Quote
Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., a leading opponent of repeal, warned shortly before the vote that “elites” would celebrate the end of “DADT” without understanding its consequences for the armed forces.  During the debate over repeal, McCain pointed to the concerns of some military commanders that a change in the policy during wartime could jeopardize the cohesion of combat units.

“I hope that when we pass this legislation that we will understand that we are doing great damage,” he said. “And we could possibly – and probably – as the Commandant of the Marine Corps said … harm the battle effectiveness that is so vital to the survival of our young men and women in the military.

The full repeal is now expected to easily pass the Senate this afternoon. It will then have to be “certified” by the Pentagon and the White House before going into effect.

McCain, who owns how many houses and married a trophy wife isn't elite?

The Republicans take words like elite and dirty them into something else.
Didn't people used to want to be elite and smart and educated?
I guess Republicans want their voters dumb.

McCain should be certified, too.

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: BayCityJohn on December 18, 2010, 12:58:32 PM
Great

Now the wingnuts will spend the next 2 years trying to find a way to reinstate the ban and impeach everyone who voted for the repeal.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: BayCityJohn on December 18, 2010, 01:09:20 PM
Breaking news: "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" repeal has just cleared its last congressional hurdle.

This discriminatory law will be relegated to the dustbin of history. This stain on our nation will be lifted forever. And you made it happen.

Today, America lived up to its highest ideals of freedom and equality. Today, our federal government recognized that ALL men and women have the right to openly serve the country they believe in. That it doesn't matter who you are, or who you love – you are not a second-class citizen.

Think of the kids out there tonight, watching this on the news – kids who are bullied for being different, who live in fear daily that their parents will hate them if they find out the truth... Think of the relief, the empowerment, the sense of possibility they'll feel, knowing that the U.S. military has said: if you're lesbian or gay, you are worthy. We want you to join us, side by side, as equals.

Think of the people across the globe – some in countries where it is literally a life-or-death decision to come out as lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender – who will hear this news and know we're one step closer toward a world where no one needs to live in fear because of who they are.

And take a moment to truly comprehend the lives ruined over the last 17 years because of this discriminatory law. The soldiers, sailors, airmen, translators, doctors and more, whose military careers were ended, whose livelihoods were threatened, whose friendships were cut off, all because the forces of bigotry and fear held out for so long.

They can never get those years back. But I hope they know that their sacrifice meant something. Their courage and integrity helped a nation understand what it means to serve. And that, more than anything else, helped bring about this historic change.

With your help, we've spent 17 years fighting for this moment. I cannot thank you enough for the dedication you've shown to get us here. Here's a brief snapshot of what you helped HRC do to win this.

Senators Joe Lieberman and Susan Collins have been our steadfast champions in this fight. Here's what Senator Lieberman said today that shows how your energy, your drive, your commitment and your focus have been behind every single step: "This historic day has been seventeen years in the making and would not have happened without the leadership of Joe Solmonese and the Human Rights Campaign."

We did it. Together. Thank you.

Onward,


Joe Solmonese
President
The Human Rights Campaign

P.S. A quick note on what happens next: the vote we won today – a critical vote to repealing this law – was to overcome a filibuster by John McCain and Republican leaders in the Senate. There may be one final vote on Sunday night or Monday and which only requires a simple majority instead of 60 votes. The bill will then go to President Obama's desk, and he has promised to sign it. In the following months ahead, the President, Secretary of Defense, and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff will be responsible for acting expeditiously to implement a repeal of the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" law. HRC advises service members that repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" is not effective immediately and service members are still at risk of being discharged on the basis of their sexual orientation until the repeal is completely implemented.

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: tonydude on December 18, 2010, 02:15:30 PM
   It's passed.  The final vote count has me confused, though.  It seems like it got more votes to pass than it did on the procedural vote to go forward.  I hope Lyle posts the final tally (he posted a similar one before).
  Anyway, to paraphrase Joe Biden, this is some big #@*& !!!!  I kind of wish there would be a thread for celebrating the final signature, with all those fireworks gifs like they have on anniversary threads.  If we don't celebrate here, then where?
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Dave Cullen on December 18, 2010, 02:16:15 PM
NY Times updated story:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/19/us/politics/19cong.html?hp

The final vote we got 65-31. So 2 more Rs switched? Hmmm. How odd. Why? Anyone know who?
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Dave Cullen on December 18, 2010, 02:21:49 PM
Great

Now the wingnuts will spend the next 2 years trying to find a way to reinstate the ban and impeach everyone who voted for the repeal.

I doubt you'll hear too much of that, actually, especially the first half. The one good thing about the stupid 60 votes hurdle in the senate is that once you pass it, it's very hard to undo. They would need 60 to repeal it, and that's way out of reach. (Plus you need the House and the prez, so until they get the white house, that's impossible.)

As for impeaching everyone who voted for it, those were mostly Dems, who they will be trying to kick out anyway. And elections are nearly always fought on the present/future. Few politicians ever get traction on a moot point, unless it's still relevant (eg, George Bush Sr raising taxes--because taxes remained an issue.)

I think this one is finally behind us. Let's celebrate.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: CellarDweller115 on December 18, 2010, 02:25:14 PM
Fantastic News!!!




(http://i54.photobucket.com/albums/g116/CellarDweller115/pfireworks.gif)(http://i54.photobucket.com/albums/g116/CellarDweller115/pfireworks.gif)(http://i54.photobucket.com/albums/g116/CellarDweller115/pfireworks.gif)(http://i54.photobucket.com/albums/g116/CellarDweller115/pfireworks.gif)(http://i54.photobucket.com/albums/g116/CellarDweller115/pfireworks.gif)(http://i54.photobucket.com/albums/g116/CellarDweller115/pfireworks.gif)(http://i54.photobucket.com/albums/g116/CellarDweller115/pfireworks.gif)

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Dave Cullen on December 18, 2010, 02:25:43 PM
ok, i found my answer:

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-pn-senate-gays-20101219,0,4926811.story

Quote
In the final vote, two more Republicans, John Ensign of Nevada and Richard Burr of North Carolina, crossed over.

i'm sure this sort of thing happens all the time, but i'm not sure i understand it. i'm guessing that means they were quietly for it all along, but chicken to be seen supporting it, but then wanted to get on the right side of history. but if they were chicken at noon, wouldn't they still be chicken at 3pm?
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: garyd on December 18, 2010, 02:41:45 PM
ok, i found my answer:

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-pn-senate-gays-20101219,0,4926811.story

i'm sure this sort of thing happens all the time, but i'm not sure i understand it. i'm guessing that means they were quietly for it all along, but chicken to be seen supporting it, but then wanted to get on the right side of history. but if they were chicken at noon, wouldn't they still be chicken at 3pm?

Basically because they are jerks and were seeking to have the best of both worlds.  They voted against cloture aligning themselves with McCain et.al.
Then when cloture was invoked they felt safe to come out of the closet and vote in favor since "it was going to pass anyway". 

At least they did the right thing when it counted. 

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: tonydude on December 18, 2010, 03:18:24 PM
(http://i275.photobucket.com/albums/jj305/tonydude-1/Allen_schindler.jpg)
   
    Well, if the fireworks were ok, maybe a photo would also be ok.
 I did not know of this story until just now, but the murder of Allen Schindler, above, was a major part of the beginning of the long journey to this day in the Senate.  Allen had been harrassed for allegedly being gay and felt unsafe, but his transfer and discharge were delayed.  His murder was brutal: he was unrecognizable.  That was on October 27, 1992.  President Clinton was said to be greatly affected by this and began the DADT policy, which was, at that time, considered a step forward.  And, of course, in time, DADT became as backwards as what had been before.  Time changes what can or can't be done. But it was a start.
  As we celebrate today, then, I hope it is not amiss to post a photo of that brave sailor.  The full story is, of course, on Wikipedia.

Rest in peace, Allen.  We won't forget.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: BayCityJohn on December 18, 2010, 03:28:40 PM
Quote
the DADT policy, which was, at that time, considered a step forward.

HUH?????

It was a big step backwards and a cop out by Clinton who promised to allow all citizens to serve in the military regardless of sexual orientation.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: BayCityJohn on December 18, 2010, 03:40:39 PM



Quote from: Betty Bowers
Now that DADT has been kicked to the curb before Republicans had time to call in bigot reinforcements in January, I wonder how many folks who fetishize the military automotively will now slap “Support *Most* of Our Troops” metallic decals on the back of their enormous cars?
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: tonydude on December 18, 2010, 03:43:31 PM
  The operative word in my post was "considered", and I picked that up from the Huffington Post article and also Wikipedia.  Of course, considered a step forward by whom?  I suppose by the general public.  I do agree, it should have been settled then.  So, "considered" would not apply to my own beliefs but rather to the public at large, which, as always, lags behind. I should have been more clear.
  Either way, Schindler's brutal death was the start, at the very least, of consciousness from straights, that something needed to be done.  And I just wanted him not to be forgotten, this day.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Dave Cullen on December 18, 2010, 04:34:01 PM
Basically because they are jerks and were seeking to have the best of both worlds.  They voted against cloture aligning themselves with McCain et.al.
Then when cloture was invoked they felt safe to come out of the closet and vote in favor since "it was going to pass anyway". 

At least they did the right thing when it counted. 



sorry, i don't think that explains it at all.

first, everyone knew the first one was going to pass when the voting started. several Rs had announced they were switching sides in the last day or two, putting us comfortably over the 60 needed. and McCain acknowledged during the final debate that his side was about to lose the vote. those two knew how it was going to turn out.

regardless, though, their fears are about getting voted out of office by angry Evangelicals. how does a cloture vote change that one way or the other?

somehow the equation MUST have changed for them, or they wouldn't have flipped, but i'm still looking for the reason.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Dave Cullen on December 18, 2010, 04:41:37 PM
Either way, Schindler's brutal death was the start, at the very least, of consciousness from straights, that something needed to be done.  And I just wanted him not to be forgotten, this day.

tony, i agree that many considered DADT to be a step forward at the time. in many ways it was, though it also institutionalized a policy into law, so that congress had to change it back--hence the 17 damn years.

i don't know where you came up with this Schindler guy as a key figure in the long gay rights struggle in the military. i don't doubt that it played a role, but i'm not aware of it playing a central role, or starting the ball rolling. and the date you posted of his death was well after Clinton had already pledged to end the ban Day 1 of his presidency.

i think it's great to honor this guy, but i'd be careful about rewriting history.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: bentgyro on December 18, 2010, 05:09:11 PM
I think that it was Barry Winchell's murder in 1999 that led President Cliinton to question DADT.
I think that the parents of Barry Winschell will feel somewhat vindicated, now.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on December 18, 2010, 05:59:37 PM
More of a weasel than I even suspected:

Joe Manchin Skipped DREAM And DADT Votes For A Christmas Party

Jillian Rayfield | December 18, 2010

Quote
After the Senate broke a GOP filibuster on Don't Ask, Don't Tell earlier today, Sen. Joe Manchin released a statement saying he had concerns about the "timing" and "implementation" of a repeal.
 
But it seems he took even more issue with the timing of the vote itself, seeing as he skipped the vote altogether to attend a Christmas party.

"While he regrets missing the votes, it was a family obligation that he just could not break," Scarbro said. "However, he has been clear on where he stands on the issues."

NRSC Communications Director Brian Walsh put out a rather sarcastic statement about Manchin's absence:

I'm sure that most Senators, as well as the hundreds of staffers who had to come to work today, would have rather been at a Christmas Party like Joe Manchin. But perhaps in Joe Manchin's world today was a win-win -- not only was he able to skip work and party, but he was also able to avoid voting on two very sensitive political issues. For a Senator who has only been on the job a few weeks, Manchin's absence today, and the apparent lack of seriousness with which he takes the job he was elected to do, speaks volumes.


http://www.tpmdc.com (http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/12/joe-manchin-skipped-dream-and-dadt-votes-for-a-christmas-party.php)
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on December 18, 2010, 06:08:35 PM

Dave, here is a bit more on why Ensign and Burr voted for repeal (from Adam Bink at the
prop 8 trial tracker site):

Quote
As those of you following the previous thread on Senate cloture will know, repeal of the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” statute just passed the full Senate, 65-31. If my math is correct, without looking at a roll call, we picked up Sens. Ensign and Burr compared to the 63-33 cloture vote this morning.

As to the question of why Sens. Ensign and Burr would switch from nay to yea votes, their offices may release statements explaining that. I know Sen. Ensign is part of the Republican leadership, who often stick together on close cloture votes. Or minds may have been changed over the span of a few hours. Or a lack of Courage (Campaign! rimshot!) on Senators’ parts. Of course, as many of you know, Sen. Ensign was on the swing vote list for weeks, and his office told Nevada LGBT activists some time ago that he would support repeal, which was quickly walked back. Lots of reasons. In any case, it’s not uncommon for folks to switch on final passage, but it is interesting.

I really do believe that all the pressure generated by you and everyone else who piled on did help make a difference. The same goes for the other 6 Republicans who voted in favor on cloture and final passage. There were 9 Republicans on the target list I’ve been publishing here for weeks, and we got 6… 7, if you count Ensign on final passage. As the last two years have shown, it is no easy task to get Republicans to support anything in the Senate. We got 6 when it mattered and 8 when it mattered a bit less. That is absolutely phenomenal. Pat yourself on the back.

Oh, here's an update that just got posted while I was doing this:

Quote
As Ben Smith notes over at Politico, Senator Burr released the following statement, explaining his decision to vote against cloture, but for the repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” once it made it past debate:

Given the generational transition that has taken place in our nation, I feel that this policy is outdated and repeal is inevitable. However, I remain convinced that the timing of this change is wrong, and making such a shift in policy at a time when we have troops deployed in active combat areas does not take into consideration the seriousness of the situation on the ground. But, the vote this morning to invoke cloture on this bill indicated that the broader Senate was prepared to move forward with a change, and despite my concerns over timing, my conclusion is that repealing Don’t Ask Don’t Tell is the right thing to do.

The potential impact of such sentiment by the Republican Senator from North Carolina goes to show that hearts and minds towards lesbian and gay Americans are changing every day. And that the work we are doing here together matters.

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on December 18, 2010, 06:28:50 PM
U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 111th Congress - 2nd Session

as compiled through Senate LIS by the Senate Bill Clerk
under the direction of the Secretary of the Senate

Vote Summary

Question: On the Motion (Motion to Concur in the House Amendment to the Senate Amendment to H.R. 2965 ) 

Vote Number:  281 Vote Date:  December 18, 2010, 03:02 PM

Required For Majority:  1/2 Vote Result:  Motion Agreed to

Measure Number:  H.R. 2965 (SBIR/STTR Reauthorization Act of 2009 )

Measure Title:  A bill to amend the Small Business Act with respect to the Small Business Innovation Research Program and the Small Business Technology Transfer Program, and for other purposes.

Vote Counts:
 YEAs 65
 NAYs 31
 Not Voting 4

Vote Summary

Alphabetical by Senator Name
Akaka (D-HI), Yea
Alexander (R-TN), Nay
Barrasso (R-WY), Nay
Baucus (D-MT), Yea
Bayh (D-IN), Yea
Begich (D-AK), Yea
Bennet (D-CO), Yea
Bennett (R-UT), Nay
Bingaman (D-NM), Yea
Bond (R-MO), Nay
Boxer (D-CA), Yea
Brown (D-OH), Yea
Brown (R-MA), Yea
Brownback (R-KS), Nay
Bunning (R-KY), Not Voting
Burr (R-NC), Yea
Cantwell (D-WA), Yea
Cardin (D-MD), Yea
Carper (D-DE), Yea
Casey (D-PA), Yea
Chambliss (R-GA), Nay
Coburn (R-OK), Nay
Cochran (R-MS), Nay
Collins (R-ME), Yea
Conrad (D-ND), Yea
Coons (D-DE), Yea
Corker (R-TN), Nay
Cornyn (R-TX), Nay
Crapo (R-ID), Nay
DeMint (R-SC), Nay
Dodd (D-CT), Yea
Dorgan (D-ND), Yea
Durbin (D-IL), Yea
Ensign (R-NV), Yea
 Enzi (R-WY), Nay
Feingold (D-WI), Yea
Feinstein (D-CA), Yea
Franken (D-MN), Yea
Gillibrand (D-NY), Yea
Graham (R-SC), Nay
Grassley (R-IA), Nay
Gregg (R-NH), Not Voting
Hagan (D-NC), Yea
Harkin (D-IA), Yea
Hatch (R-UT), Not Voting
Hutchison (R-TX), Nay
Inhofe (R-OK), Nay
Inouye (D-HI), Yea
Isakson (R-GA), Nay
Johanns (R-NE), Nay
Johnson (D-SD), Yea
Kerry (D-MA), Yea
Kirk (R-IL), Yea
Klobuchar (D-MN), Yea
Kohl (D-WI), Yea
Kyl (R-AZ), Nay
Landrieu (D-LA), Yea
Lautenberg (D-NJ), Yea
Leahy (D-VT), Yea
LeMieux (R-FL), Nay
Levin (D-MI), Yea
Lieberman (ID-CT), Yea
Lincoln (D-AR), Yea
Lugar (R-IN), Nay
Manchin (D-WV), Not Voting
McCain (R-AZ), Nay
McCaskill (D-MO), Yea
McConnell (R-KY), Nay
 Menendez (D-NJ), Yea
Merkley (D-OR), Yea
Mikulski (D-MD), Yea
Murkowski (R-AK), Yea
Murray (D-WA), Yea
Nelson (D-FL), Yea
Nelson (D-NE), Yea
Pryor (D-AR), Yea
Reed (D-RI), Yea
Reid (D-NV), Yea
Risch (R-ID), Nay
Roberts (R-KS), Nay
Rockefeller (D-WV), Yea
Sanders (I-VT), Yea
Schumer (D-NY), Yea
Sessions (R-AL), Nay
Shaheen (D-NH), Yea
Shelby (R-AL), Nay
Snowe (R-ME), Yea
Specter (D-PA), Yea
Stabenow (D-MI), Yea
Tester (D-MT), Yea
Thune (R-SD), Nay
Udall (D-CO), Yea
Udall (D-NM), Yea
Vitter (R-LA), Nay
Voinovich (R-OH), Yea
Warner (D-VA), Yea
Webb (D-VA), Yea
Whitehouse (D-RI), Yea
Wicker (R-MS), Nay
Wyden (D-OR), Yea
 
Grouped By Vote Position

YEAs ---65

Akaka (D-HI)
Baucus (D-MT)
Bayh (D-IN)
Begich (D-AK)
Bennet (D-CO)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Boxer (D-CA)
Brown (D-OH)
Brown (R-MA)
Burr (R-NC)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Cardin (D-MD)
Carper (D-DE)
Casey (D-PA)
Collins (R-ME)
Conrad (D-ND)
Coons (D-DE)
Dodd (D-CT)
Dorgan (D-ND)
Durbin (D-IL)
Ensign (R-NV)
Feingold (D-WI)
 Feinstein (D-CA)
Franken (D-MN)
Gillibrand (D-NY)
Hagan (D-NC)
Harkin (D-IA)
Inouye (D-HI)
Johnson (D-SD)
Kerry (D-MA)
Kirk (R-IL)
Klobuchar (D-MN)
Kohl (D-WI)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
Lieberman (ID-CT)
Lincoln (D-AR)
McCaskill (D-MO)
Menendez (D-NJ)
Merkley (D-OR)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Murkowski (R-AK)
 Murray (D-WA)
Nelson (D-FL)
Nelson (D-NE)
Pryor (D-AR)
Reed (D-RI)
Reid (D-NV)
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Sanders (I-VT)
Schumer (D-NY)
Shaheen (D-NH)
Snowe (R-ME)
Specter (D-PA)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Tester (D-MT)
Udall (D-CO)
Udall (D-NM)
Voinovich (R-OH)
Warner (D-VA)
Webb (D-VA)
Whitehouse (D-RI)
Wyden (D-OR)
 
NAYs ---31

Alexander (R-TN)
Barrasso (R-WY)
Bennett (R-UT)
Bond (R-MO)
Brownback (R-KS)
Chambliss (R-GA)
Coburn (R-OK)
Cochran (R-MS)
Corker (R-TN)
Cornyn (R-TX)
Crapo (R-ID)
 DeMint (R-SC)
Enzi (R-WY)
Graham (R-SC)
Grassley (R-IA)
Hutchison (R-TX)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Isakson (R-GA)
Johanns (R-NE)
Kyl (R-AZ)
LeMieux (R-FL)
Lugar (R-IN)
 McCain (R-AZ)
McConnell (R-KY)
Risch (R-ID)
Roberts (R-KS)
Sessions (R-AL)
Shelby (R-AL)
Thune (R-SD)
Vitter (R-LA)
Wicker (R-MS)
 
Not Voting - 4

Bunning (R-KY)
Gregg (R-NH)
Hatch (R-UT)
Manchin (D-WV)
 
 
Grouped by Home State
Alabama: Sessions (R-AL), Nay Shelby (R-AL), Nay
Alaska: Begich (D-AK), Yea Murkowski (R-AK), Yea
Arizona: Kyl (R-AZ), Nay McCain (R-AZ), Nay
Arkansas: Lincoln (D-AR), Yea Pryor (D-AR), Yea
California: Boxer (D-CA), Yea Feinstein (D-CA), Yea
Colorado: Bennet (D-CO), Yea Udall (D-CO), Yea
Connecticut: Dodd (D-CT), Yea Lieberman (ID-CT), Yea
Delaware: Carper (D-DE), Yea Coons (D-DE), Yea
Florida: LeMieux (R-FL), Nay Nelson (D-FL), Yea
Georgia: Chambliss (R-GA), Nay Isakson (R-GA), Nay
Hawaii: Akaka (D-HI), Yea Inouye (D-HI), Yea
Idaho: Crapo (R-ID), Nay Risch (R-ID), Nay
Illinois: Durbin (D-IL), Yea Kirk (R-IL), Yea
Indiana: Bayh (D-IN), Yea Lugar (R-IN), Nay
Iowa: Grassley (R-IA), Nay Harkin (D-IA), Yea
Kansas: Brownback (R-KS), Nay Roberts (R-KS), Nay
Kentucky: Bunning (R-KY), Not Voting McConnell (R-KY), Nay
Louisiana: Landrieu (D-LA), Yea Vitter (R-LA), Nay
Maine: Collins (R-ME), Yea Snowe (R-ME), Yea
Maryland: Cardin (D-MD), Yea Mikulski (D-MD), Yea
Massachusetts: Brown (R-MA), Yea Kerry (D-MA), Yea
Michigan: Levin (D-MI), Yea Stabenow (D-MI), Yea
Minnesota: Franken (D-MN), Yea Klobuchar (D-MN), Yea
Mississippi: Cochran (R-MS), Nay Wicker (R-MS), Nay
Missouri: Bond (R-MO), Nay McCaskill (D-MO), Yea
Montana: Baucus (D-MT), Yea Tester (D-MT), Yea
Nebraska: Johanns (R-NE), Nay Nelson (D-NE), Yea
Nevada: Ensign (R-NV), Yea Reid (D-NV), Yea
New Hampshire: Gregg (R-NH), Not Voting Shaheen (D-NH), Yea
New Jersey: Lautenberg (D-NJ), Yea Menendez (D-NJ), Yea
New Mexico: Bingaman (D-NM), Yea Udall (D-NM), Yea
New York: Gillibrand (D-NY), Yea Schumer (D-NY), Yea
North Carolina: Burr (R-NC), Yea Hagan (D-NC), Yea
North Dakota: Conrad (D-ND), Yea Dorgan (D-ND), Yea
Ohio: Brown (D-OH), Yea Voinovich (R-OH), Yea
Oklahoma: Coburn (R-OK), Nay Inhofe (R-OK), Nay
Oregon: Merkley (D-OR), Yea Wyden (D-OR), Yea
Pennsylvania: Casey (D-PA), Yea Specter (D-PA), Yea
Rhode Island: Reed (D-RI), Yea Whitehouse (D-RI), Yea
South Carolina: DeMint (R-SC), Nay Graham (R-SC), Nay
South Dakota: Johnson (D-SD), Yea Thune (R-SD), Nay
Tennessee: Alexander (R-TN), Nay Corker (R-TN), Nay
Texas: Cornyn (R-TX), Nay Hutchison (R-TX), Nay
Utah: Bennett (R-UT), Nay Hatch (R-UT), Not Voting
Vermont: Leahy (D-VT), Yea Sanders (I-VT), Yea
Virginia: Warner (D-VA), Yea Webb (D-VA), Yea
Washington: Cantwell (D-WA), Yea Murray (D-WA), Yea
West Virginia: Manchin (D-WV), Not Voting Rockefeller (D-WV), Yea
Wisconsin: Feingold (D-WI), Yea Kohl (D-WI), Yea
Wyoming: Barrasso (R-WY), Nay Enzi (R-WY), Nay


I will add:

THOSE NOT VOTING BECAUSE THEY'RE ATTENDING A PARTY:
Manchin (D-WV)

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: tonydude on December 18, 2010, 06:39:34 PM
i don't know where you came up with this Schindler guy as a key figure in the long gay rights struggle in the military. i don't doubt that it played a role, but i'm not aware of it playing a central role, or starting the ball rolling.

i think it's great to honor this guy, but i'd be careful about rewriting history.
 Well, as usual, I got it from the Huffington Post, which sometimes over-influences me.  Somebody had led off the reporting of the Senate vote with a long story of Schindler's murder.  You're right....it's been a long struggle, pre-dating that event.  But it was a moving article, and so I took the writer's POV, too quickly, as the accepted history.  But, as you noted, it did at least somehow play a role.  To what extent, though, is something various writers will explore and they will, of course, come to different conclusions. I obviously need to read more than HuffPo, that much is clear. That place always sends me off like a rocket.

ETA: the Wikipedia entry was also an influence;  I just re-read it.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on December 18, 2010, 06:40:59 PM
Measure Title:  A bill to amend the Small Business Act with respect to the Small Business Innovation Research Program and the Small Business Technology Transfer Program, and for other purposes.

I'm not sure why this is the measure title?   But it's what's on the
Senate Vote page under this and the cloture votes...?

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/vote_menu_111_2.htm
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on December 18, 2010, 07:02:47 PM

Harry Reid:
"There are those who say 'now is not the time to repeal Don't Ask Don't Tell.'
They are right.  The time was yesterday."

Joe Lieberman:
"This was the happiest day of my Senate career."

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on December 18, 2010, 07:15:07 PM

The Courage Campaign not wasting any time:

Quote
But we ain’t done yet.

Courage Campaign is going to mount an effort to pressure the Obama Administration to quickly certify repeal- and we need your people-powered support.

Here’s the skinny: the Senate vote was the last major legislative obstacle. Now the bill will head to President Obama’s desk for his signature. But even after the President signs this law, no one can serve openly. Certification is first required from the President, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, and Secretary of Defense.

It’s part of a backroom deal cut months ago, and it’s ridiculous. We’ve seen how the Administration has dragged their feet over the past two years on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”. We can’t let that happen again. We have to mount a fight to finish the job, and we need your help. Show the Administration that we’re not going to stand for any more foot-dragging—through online ads, organizers, and phone banks that will remind this administration daily that the job is not done until they certify repeal.

http://www.couragecampaign.org/WeWon

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: garyd on December 18, 2010, 07:25:52 PM
sorry, i don't think that explains it at all.



regardless, though, their fears are about getting voted out of office by angry Evangelicals. how does a cloture vote change that one way or the other?

somehow the equation MUST have changed for them, or they wouldn't have flipped,but I'm still looking for the reason.

Thanks, but no need to be sorry.  I am sure that it is not the whole story and I do not claim that it is.
My observations, however, suggest that party members tend to stick together on cloture votes for a variety of reasons and then feel free to vote differently when the issue finally goes to the floor.
Cloture votes are often cast, not for re-election purposes, but rather to garner party leader support for committee appointments, etc.
Burr was just re-elected and does not face his electorate for another six years.
Ensign, who does proclaim to be an evangelical and is a bit of a slimeball,(understatement in my opinion) registered support for repeal with LGBT in Nevada and then back-tracked.
He IS up for re-election during the next cycle, I believe.

But, as I said, I imagine there is more to it and I look forward to your investigative journalist report.

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: chuckyv on December 19, 2010, 05:36:46 AM
It is thrilling to watch this unfold. History as it happens. I am not sure I agree with some comments on news sites that this is the greatest thing since Stonewall, but it certainly is a huge step in the right direction.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on December 19, 2010, 10:50:17 AM
It is thrilling to watch this unfold. History as it happens. I am not sure I agree with some comments on news sites that this is the greatest thing since Stonewall, but it certainly is a huge step in the right direction.

I know what you mean.  We believe things like this to be a no brainer.  It should have been done
years ago or not ever even taken place, so when it changes, when it finally happens, to me it's
like "duh" and it doesn't feel like some momentous thing.  But I also know that it is a big deal.
So one has a bit of a disconnect within.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: atruant on December 19, 2010, 11:32:46 AM
I know what you mean.  We believe things like this to be a no brainer.  It should have been done
years ago or not ever even taken place, so when it changes, when it finally happens, to me it's
like "duh" and it doesn't feel like some momentous thing.  But I also know that it is a big deal.
So one has a bit of a disconnect within.

Lyle, like chuckyv, I am also thrilled this happening. I think it was inevitable, if not now, then I think somewhere down the line.

I was in the Canadian air force in 1992 when the laws changed here. Had I come out before that, I would have been discharged. I was ecstatic then, and now have much the same feeling for you guys!!  ;D
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on December 19, 2010, 12:25:21 PM
Right on, John! I wasn't out in the Army either, of course, in fact, I really didn't realize this aspect of myself until several years after I got out. Even though I really enjoyed the hunkiness of my fellow soldiers, I didn't understand what was going on.

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Dave Cullen on December 19, 2010, 02:35:36 PM
Dave, here is a bit more on why Ensign and Burr voted for repeal (from Adam Bink at the
prop 8 trial tracker site):

Oh, here's an update that just got posted while I was doing this:


thanks, lyle. that explanation made a lot of sense.

link please.

---

can everyone please always link to outside material you reference. thanks.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Dave Cullen on December 19, 2010, 02:39:33 PM
 Well, as usual, I got it from the Huffington Post, which sometimes over-influences me.  S

thanks, tony.

it would also be useful to be more specific than citing Huffington Post. since that is mostly a collection of independent bloggers, HuffPo doesn't reveal much about the source.

it's very different than citing a news org, like CNN or NY Times. if it's on their site, it's been approved by editors, possibly fact-checked, and the author is probably also on their staff. and if the story is wrong, they'll correct. so using their name as the citation means something, and it's significant.

with blogger collectives like HuffPo, it's a bit like citing "the internet" as the source.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Dave Cullen on December 19, 2010, 03:04:38 PM
24 hours later, and i'm still glowing.

and i think the best part is that while it was huge for us, it was really no big deal for straight people (anymore). so, my blog piece:

Gay jubilation on DADT, straight 'approving shrug'—Perfect

http://www.davecullenblog.com/2010/12/gay-jubilation-on-dadt-straight.html
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: trekfan on December 19, 2010, 03:31:09 PM
 ;D  I'm very happy!
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on December 20, 2010, 11:58:41 AM
thanks, lyle. that explanation made a lot of sense.
link please.

You're welcome and here's the link on the post about why Ensign and Burr may have switched votes:

http://prop8trialtracker.com/2010/12/senate-votes/ (http://prop8trialtracker.com/2010/12/18/senate-votes-to-send-repeal-of-dont-ask-dont-tell-to-president-obamas-desk/)


Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on December 20, 2010, 04:48:35 PM

Obama to Sign ‘Don’t Ask’ Bill on Wednesday
By Sheryl Gay Stolberg
December 20, 2010

President Obama will sign the repeal of the military’s ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ policy into law Wednesday morning, and may hold a news conference his press secretary, Robert Gibbs, said on Monday.

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/ (http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/12/20/obama-to-sign-dont-ask-bill-on-wednesday/)

Title: Don't Ask, Don't Tell repeal: photos of the signing
Post by: Marge_Innavera on December 23, 2010, 09:45:05 AM
Some very good photos of people attending the signing here at AMERICAblog:  http://gay.americablog.com/2010/12/photos-from-todays-dadt-bill-signing.html

They include David Mixner, Servicemembers United's Alex Nicholson and Jarrod Chlapowski, Robin McGehee and Heather Cronk of GetEqual; Katie Miller, "a West Point cadet who recently quit rather than lie about her sexual orientation" and lots more.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Jer009 on December 24, 2010, 12:59:27 PM
Not exactly new, but amusing nonetheless:


Repeal Of 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' Paves Way For Gay Sex Right On Battlefield, Opponents Fantasize

(snip)

Others have argued that allowing gay soldiers to push their lifestyle on others, testing the limits of pleasure a man can take before he erupts in uncontrollable ecstasy, would seriously damage morale.

"The military should not be used to advance some radical, steamy, mouthwatering social agenda," said Rep. Trent Franks (R-AZ).

"Our men need to know they can count on each other in battle, and we can't have them getting distracted by illicit romantic dalliances," said Gen. James T. Conway, commandant of the Marine Corps. "Especially if one's a little blond Adonis farm boy and his buddy's a real tough street kid straight out of Brooklyn. I mean, think about it: What if they lock eyes and abandon their post to start ripping each other's fatigues off, revealing twin sets of glistening washboard abs and at last fulfilling their hidden passions?"

http://www.theonion.com/articles/repeal-of-dont-ask-dont-tell-paves-way-for-gay-sex,17698/#enlarge
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: tonydude on December 24, 2010, 02:51:46 PM
 General Conway has apparently been reading slash, and probably on this forum.  Does anybody want to 'fess up  :D ?
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Marge_Innavera on December 29, 2010, 08:52:14 AM
An excellent cartoon by John Sherffius earlier this week:


http://i135.photobucket.com/albums/q135/talkstocoyotes/cartoon-122310.jpg
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on December 31, 2010, 12:25:17 PM
Many of you know Stilllearning from the forum.  She was one of the editors of TDS
and she took a job in Germany where she is residing and working with U.S. troops.  I had
asked her months ago while DADT was being discussed in the U.S. if she had ever heard
anything from the military people she worked with about this topic and she told me she had
not heard anyone talk about it.  I recently received an email from her and I don't think she'd
mind if I shared some of what she wrote:

Quote
Lyle, you asked me a while ago what the military members that I work with think of DADT, at the time, it wasn't discussed much at all. But with the repeal imminent, I thought you might be interested in what I've heard.

Overwhelmingly, people, both male and female, are in support of the repeal. One soldier that I work with, who has been to Iraq once and wants to return to Afghanistan - the kind of guy who drinks protein drinks and lift weights religiously to stay bulked up, said clearly and definitively that if "you're in this fight with me, we're standing side by side fighting the same fight, I don't give a fuck whether you're gay or not. We get the job done, look out for the mission and each other, that's all the matters."

Others have sort of a "isn't it ridiculous that this is even up for debate" sort of attitude. They all say there have always been gays in the military doing the jobs that needs to be done, now they just don't have to lie about who they are. Everyone I've heard comment, personally knows gay servicemen serving in the military.

Most, but not all of these folks that I heard comment are young, I do think that's a factor in their attitudes; I was so encouraged by their comments.

Happy New Year,
Stilllearning
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: tonydude on January 10, 2011, 11:37:56 AM
 Again, with the soldiers playing gay.  This may have been part of the tolerant views before repeal.....will this be allowed after?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aKvy9UhQRXQ
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on January 10, 2011, 03:57:29 PM
Again, with the soldiers playing gay.

Maybe some of them ARE gay.
Interesting question nonetheless.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: atruant on January 10, 2011, 04:18:42 PM
Again, with the soldiers playing gay.  This may have been part of the tolerant views before repeal.....will this be allowed after?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aKvy9UhQRXQ

They won't have to play being gay. They can just be.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on January 29, 2011, 04:33:01 PM
Amazing what a marriage license can do.

His husband's last wish was to have his ashes placed in the columbarium of the Naval Academy. The husband was a retired Marine.

http://www.suntimes.com/3526027-417/ketterson-academy-naval-usna-husband.html

 
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on January 29, 2011, 06:06:51 PM
Another hopeful sign. A message from Commandant Gen Amos and SgtMaj Kent of the USMC.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qPn3V3KuhaM

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: CellarDweller115 on January 29, 2011, 06:50:47 PM
Thanks for posting those, Fritz!  Very worthwhile reading.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on February 05, 2011, 07:57:51 AM
Another story about the man who buried his husband at the USNA. Audio available after noon Eastern Saturday.

http://www.npr.org/2011/02/05/133520553/Gay-Spouses-Bittersweet-Story-Of-Military-Support

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on February 28, 2011, 05:40:48 PM
http://joemygod.blogspot.com/2011/02/army-issues-dadt-guidelines.html

Quote
The U.S. Army has posted a number of DADT-related guidelines on its official site where it notes that due to DOMA "there will be no changes to eligibility standards for military benefits and services." Meaning no on-base housing for gay couples and no medical care for spouses.

Here's the Army list "Top Ten Things Soldiers Need To Know" about the repeal of DADT.

1. Accessions & Separations Policies: Upon repeal, the Army will no longer separate Soldiers solely on the basis of homosexual acts, a statement that a Soldier is gay, lesbian or bisexual, or marriage to a person of the same sex. Statements about sexual orientation or lawful acts of gay and lesbian conduct will not be a bar to military service or admission to any accession program. Sexual orientation will continue to be a personal and private matter.

2. Standards of Conduct Apply Equally to Everyone: All Soldiers will be held to the same standard of conduct. All members are responsible for upholding and maintaining high standards of the U.S. Military at all times and in all places.

3. Personal Privacy: Commanders may not establish practices that physically segregate Soldiers according to sexual orientation. Commanders do have the discretion to alter billeting assignments to accommodate privacy concerns of individuals on a case-by-case basis where it is in the interest of maintaining morale, good order and discipline, and is consistent with performance of the mission.

4. Moral and Religious Concerns: There will be no changes regarding any Soldier's free exercise of religious beliefs, nor are there any changes to policies concerning the Chaplain Corps and its duties. The Chaplain Corps' First Amendment freedoms and its duty to care for all will not change. Soldiers will continue to respect and serve with others who may hold different views and beliefs.

5. Benefits: There will be no changes to eligibility standards for military benefits and services. The Defense of Marriage Act prohibits the Federal Government from recognizing any same-sex marriage, so same sex partners do not qualify as dependents for many military benefits and services. A same-sex partner should be treated the same as an unrelated third party (e.g. girlfriend, boyfriend). All Soldiers will continue to have various benefits for which they may designate any beneficiary regardless of relationship.

6. Equal Opportunity: Sexual orientation will not be placed alongside race, color, religion, sex and national origin as a class under the Military Equal Opportunity Program and therefore will not be dealt with through the MEO complaint process. All Soldiers, regardless of sexual orientation are entitled to an environment free from personal, social, or institutional barriers that prevent Soldiers from rising to the highest level of responsibility possible. Harassment or abuse of any kind, including that based on sexual orientation, is unacceptable and will be dealt with through command or inspector general channels.

7. Duty Assignments: There are no changes to assignment policy. All Soldiers will continue to be eligible for world-wide assignment without consideration of sexual orientation. Soldiers assigned to duty, or otherwise serving, in countries in which gay and lesbian conduct is prohibited will abide by the guidance provided to them by their local commanders.

8. Medical Policy: There are no changes to existing medical policies.

9. Release and Service Commitments: There will be no new policy to allow for release from service commitments for Soldiers opposed to repeal of DADT or to serving with gay or lesbian Soldiers.

10. Collection and Retention of Sexual Orientation Data: Sexual orientation is a personal and private matter. Commanders will not request, collect, or maintain information about the sexual orientation of Soldiers.

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: estefue on March 01, 2011, 12:18:16 PM
So it will be up to those in the military to start asking for the rights they should have.  Why should their spouses not get support? 
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on March 01, 2011, 01:09:42 PM

Another hurdle being worked on to dismantle:  DOMA.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on March 01, 2011, 03:53:38 PM
Definitely still a long way to go. But perfection never comes complete at first, unlike Athena bursting forth full grown from the head of Zeus.

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on March 08, 2011, 04:00:03 PM
A letter from LtCol Victor Fehrenbach to GALA-ND/SMC, the gay and lesbian alumni/ae group of Notre Dame and St Mary's College:

Quote
The Repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell
by Lt. Col. Victor Fehrenbach, '91

On December 22, 2011, I had the honor of witnessing President Barak Obama sign the repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" into law. After penning his signature, he slapped the historic legislation and proclaimed: "This is DONE." For me, personally, the marked the unofficial end of my almost 3-year ordeal. And it was the culmination of a promise that he made to me in June of 2009. At our first meeting, he looked me in the eyes and said, "We're going to get 'this' done."

While his words were inspiring, they didn't tell the whole story. The battle to repeal DADT had ended with those words, but in reality, our battle for equal rights continues; this victory was just the beginning in many ways.

Historically, the military had led the way in civil rights. President Truman ended military segregation in 1948--16 years before the Civil Rights Act was passed. At that time, polls in the general public and even the military showed that our society was not ready for such a dramatic advance. And even then, it took decades for old prejudices to wither. Gender equality in the military progressed much faster in the military than it did in society as well. There were female general officers in the military in the 1960s--long before there was a female CEO of a Fortune 500 company--and the service academies admitted women in the 1970s. While these struggles continue, it was the military that led the way for change. And the intangible aspect of these advances was that it allowed ACCEPTANCE to progress at a much faster rate.

So far, in the struggle for gay equal rights, the military has actually lagged society. And as I saw at Notre Dame this fall, my alma mater has a long way to go in ridding itself of its own version of DADT. However, I think the parallel for accelerating acceptance is still there. I don't think we'll see the full benefits of what the repeal of DADT means for 5 or 10 years, because one of the intangible benefits is that it gives us HOPE.

Last fall following a rash of gay teen suicides, many of us got involved with the "Trevor" and "It Gets Better" projects. While we told young gays that "it gets better," the reality of the situation was that the persecution and discrimination they were facing might continue into their adult life. They might be denied the American dream: they could get fired from their jobs, they couldn't get married or have children, and they couldn't choose what neighborhood they wanted to live in. Repealing DADT was the first REAL sign that it WILL get better. And it is OUR duty to MAKE IT BETTER...for them.

I was inspired by the Notre Dame and Saint Mary's students I met in October. Even though their University wouldn't fully acknowledge and respect them, they knew who they were and they respected themselves. More importantly, they were not ashamed of whom they were and they were very aware of their duty to serve--to make Notre Dame a place of acceptance and equality for future students. For the Notre Dame community, this struggle continues...it is not "done." But I have HOPE for the future, because of the incredible leaders who are committed to making it better.

Yours in Notre Dame,
VJF


Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on March 11, 2011, 04:23:33 PM
I don't have a link, so I'll post verbatim.


Quote
Viral post pits coverage of Sheen, fallen soldiers

By Wayne Drash, CNN

It started with a Facebook status update. Upset at the media's coverage of Charlie Sheen, someone took up for American soldiers dying in Afghanistan.

"Charlie Sheen is all over the news because he's a celebrity drug addict," it said, "while Andrew Wilfahrt 31, Brian Tabada 21, Rudolph Hizon 22, Chauncy Mays 25, are soldiers who gave their lives this week with no media mention. Please honor them by posting this as your status for a little while."

The status update has since gone viral, shared by tens of thousands on Facebook. An abbreviated version is on Twitter.

When a friend of mine posted the message on her Facebook page, it was a sobering reminder of the news media’s failings of covering the Afghanistan war. I kept returning to the names of the four soldiers. Who were these men? What’s their story?

I started by calling the father of Cpl. Andrew Wilfahrt (pronounced WILL-fort) in Rosemount, Minnesota.

“I think it’s spot on,” Jeff Wilfahrt said of the viral post.

His 31-year-old son was killed while on foot patrol outside Kandahar on February 27, around the same day the Sheen media blitz kicked into high gear.

“From the Charlie Sheens to Lindsay Lohans, who are these people and what good have they done in society?” Jeff Wilfahrt said. “What are we collectively doing as a society? How do you wake people up?

“In part, sir,” he said, “I blame the press.”

Andrew Wilfahrt was a Renaissance man with an infectious laugh. In his obituary, his parents described him as “compassionate, smart and witty. He was an admirer, composer and player of music who believed deeply in art and humanity. Andrew was fascinated by math, palindromes, maps, patterns, mashed potatoes and the absurd.”

He was also anti-war - part of a “strong family of lefties” from Minnesota, his father said. Andrew stunned everyone when he announced two years ago he was joining the Army.

“He didn’t have a child and a wife,” Jeff Wilfahrt said. “In a way, he went over so that somebody with a young family wouldn’t die.”

The grieving father added, “He was a gay soldier.”

His son agonized over the decision to join the military because Andrew knew he’d have to keep his sexuality a secret. He kept quiet when he first signed up, but his fellow soldiers knew.

“Andrew told me one of the reasons he wanted to enlist was that he felt guilty as a civilian when so many men with wives and children were separated from their families," one of his comrades posted on Facebook. "He joined the fight so that guys like me didn’t have to. He is my hero, my friend, and I miss him. Sleep well, buddy. You earned it.”

Andrew’s younger sister, Martha, said the “least interesting thing” about her brother was his sexuality.

“Quite frankly,” the father said, “nobody gave a s*** he was gay. He was a good soldier.”

His mother, Lori Wilfahrt, told Minnesota Public Radio her son was an “interesting, wonderful young man” who joined the service because he was “looking for a purpose.” Andrew wanted to be with a “group of people that would be working together toward something.”

In a recent letter home, he told his mother that “everybody knows … [and] nobody cares” about his homosexuality. In combat, he rode with two other soldiers. One was African-American, the other from Hawaii. The unit called them "Team Minority."

“He was a gentle soul and he was very kind and compassionate,” said Lori Wilfahrt.

As Sheen’s every comment was dissected on TV and plastered across the internet, the Wilfahrts quietly buried their son.

“In exchange for a son, we got a flag and a bunch of medals,” his dad said. “That’s a helluva tradeoff.”

He’s torn by all that’s happened. Jeff Wilfahrt said he’s always been a peace activist and staunch opponent of war, yet he added, “I’m so proud of him and his service.”

His voice breaks. It’s likely his son is among the first gay soldiers to die in combat since Don’t Ask Don’t Tell was repealed in December. “I’d do anything to honor my son.”

'Truly an American hero'

From Texas to Nevada to California, three other families mourned loved ones mentioned in the viral post. I was unable to reach those families, but I pieced together these snapshots from local reports and Army news releases.

Spc. Brian Tabada was the youngest soldier honored in the Facebook status update. A fire support specialist with the 101st Airborne, he was killed February 27 in northeastern Afghanistan when his patrol was ambushed by insurgents using small-arms fire and rocket-propelled grenades.

He joined the Army in 2008 and quickly earned an array of medals, including the Army Achievement Medal.

His mother met his flag-draped coffin at Dover Air Force Base and escorted her son’s body home to Las Vegas. Nevada’s governor ordered flags at half-staff.

“Tabada made the ultimate sacrifice and we are forever grateful,” Gov. Brian Sandoval said in a written statement. “I believe it is right to honor his life, service and his sacrifice.”

Spc. Rudolph Hizon, a 22-year-old Los Angeles native, was killed when insurgents attacked his brigade with the 10th Mountain Division in Afghanistan’s eastern Logar province.

A Bronze Star recipient, Hizon was best known for his radiant smile and love of life. Hizon enlisted with the Army in January 2009 and was deployed to Afghanistan last October.

“I will always think of him as the happy and cheerful person he was,” Spc. Joshua Gonzales told Task Force Patriot public affairs. “I’m going to miss him dearly.”

“He is truly an American hero,” Tito Pong wrote on a Los Angeles Times obituary tribute page. “We are very proud of him and we are very much going to miss him.” Added Pfc. Lorien Rilate, “You had such a big heart and you always knew how to make someone feel better.”

In the eastern corner of Texas, residents in the town of Cookville honored Staff Sgt. Chauncy Mays, a father of two young girls. Mays, a member of the 10th Mountain Division, was killed February 28 in eastern Afghanistan’s Wardak province.

A highly decorated soldier, Mays worked as an explosives ordnance disposal technician; the Army credits him with saving countless lives for disarming hidden bombs in the region.

“He was a leader who led from the front,” Army Sgt. Chandara Hak told Task Force Patriot public affairs. “He was always careful, but never fearful. I will do my best to follow in his example.”

Army Capt. Aaron Teller said Mays epitomized the best of the American soldier. “He would give you the shirt off his back without hesitation.”

Those were traits Mays displayed even in high school. "He cared about people and worked hard to encourage them," his teacher, Josh Stegall, said at a memorial service. "He lived to serve."

Since February 26, when the Sheen story began dominating headlines, at least 13 U.S. troops have died in support of the Afghanistan war. Besides the four honored in the Facebook post, seven others were Sgt. Kristopher Gould, 25; Spc Christopher Stark, 22; Pfc. David Fahey, 23; Spc. Jason Weaver, 22; Cpl. Jordan Stanton, 20; Staff Sgt. Mark Wells, 31; and Pfc. Kalin Johnson, 19.

Senior Airman Nicholas Alden, 25, and Airman Zachary Cuddeback were killed in a March 2 attack on troops at the airport in Frankfurt, Germany.

Italian Lt. Massimo Ranzani, 36, and British Lance Cpl. Liam Richard Tasker were also killed in Afghanistan in late February and early March. Another British soldier whose name has not been released was killed Wednesday.

As I looked at the names of those who’ve died in the last two weeks, I thought about my phone conversation with Jeff Wilfahrt.

“Get this on the front headlines,” he said, “and make people aware of what’s going on.

“That’s what I’d do if I was king. But I'm just an unemployed 58-year-old man in Minnesota who misses his son.”

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: bentgyro on March 11, 2011, 04:49:27 PM
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
That's heart wrenching and true.
May all the soldiers in the above RIP.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: cfmedic12 on March 13, 2011, 08:34:00 PM
It's never easy to lose a mate.  :(
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on March 14, 2011, 06:46:24 PM

I replied to your post on the other thread, cf.  Maybe it's a start...and welcome!
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on March 30, 2011, 06:43:50 PM

House Repubs. schedule hearing on DADT repeal this Friday
Tuesday, March 29, 2011
by Joe Sudbay (DC)
 
Quote
A Republican-controlled House Armed Services subcommittee on Friday is set to hold a hearing to oversee the implementation of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" repeal. According to the committee website, the title of the hearing is "Review of the Implementation Plans for the Repeal of Law and Policies Governing Service by Openly Gay and Lesbian Service Members."

Right. Just a review. "Only" 80% of the American people support repeal. But, the GOPers rarely miss an opportunity for some rhetorical gay-bashing.

Alex Nicholson is calling out the House Republicans over the real purpose of this hearing: Alex Nicholson, executive director of Servicemembers United, said his organization supports the routine practice of congressional oversight, but added the purpose of the House hearing is "rather transparent."

"Some House Republicans, including and especially the chair of the House Armed Services Committee, would like nothing more than to derail the Defense Department's thus-far successful planning for repeal implementation, or at least slow it down considerably," Nicholson said. "This cadre of reactionaries needs to understand once and for all that this issue is settled and no more time or taxpayer money should be wasted trying to take us backwards on this."

Exactly.

http://gay.americablog.com/2011/03/house-repubs-schedule-hearing-on-dadt.html
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: lislis on March 31, 2011, 02:20:40 AM
http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2011/03/military_past_dadt.html

U.S. Military Marches Past 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell'

Full Recruitment Goals Met on Eve of Gay and Lesbian Integration
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on April 09, 2011, 12:53:53 PM
Well, some progress. The Navy has stopped discharge proceedings against the sailor who fell asleep in the bunk of another sailor.

http://www.cnn.com/2011/US/04/08/sailor.sleepover/#

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on April 10, 2011, 11:39:35 AM

I don't mind discharging seamen.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on April 10, 2011, 11:40:23 AM

Yes, I had to go there.

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on April 10, 2011, 01:22:47 PM
Can be quite pleasant.

Title: Tea Party: We'll trade the debt ceiling for DADT
Post by: Marge_Innavera on May 11, 2011, 06:50:35 AM
Anyone heard the claims that the Tea Koch party just wants "fiscal responsibility and smaller government"?  Sure they do.  Except now we can add support of Don't Ask Don't Tell to the mix, with a little dash of gender discrimination added:

"During a press conference in Washington on Monday morning, Tea Party activists representatives gathered to express their disappointment with House Republicans for supporting increasing the debt ceiling.

"William Temple, Chairman of the Tea Party Founding Fathers, said he was '100% opposed to raising the debt ceiling' but also offered House Republicans a list of compromises that might allow the tea party movement as a whole' to “possibly forgive Boehner and the House Republicans a small bump in the debt limit.

"Included in the list: slowing down on 'injecting open homosexuality and females into forward combat roles.' Temple explained"

Quote
When the Pentagon's own studies show that military effeminization may have an extremely costly impact on recruiting and retention, when Islamists have shown their willingness to sexually brutalize American female reporters, why would John Boehner's House Republicans be caving to political correctness? Why would House Republicans who know better be fostering inappropriate attractions in the intimacy of tents, bunks, barracks, platoons, subs, tanks, convoys, cockpits, latrines, showers, toilets and locker rooms when we are fighting wars in three Muslim nations?

http://equalitymatters.org/blog/201105090011?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on May 11, 2011, 03:21:26 PM
They're showing their true colors more and more.

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on May 12, 2011, 12:30:35 PM
One reason former Representative from Pennsylvania, Patrick Murphy, was not
re-elected to a third term was probably his leadership on repealing DADT.  But
it happened while he was serving in the lame duck session of Congress. I don't
know all of his attributes or faults, but I do know he has stood up for this issue
on behalf of gay servicemembers and even though not a current Representative,
he is still doing so.  And I appluad him for that.

While the House committee yesterday was trying to slow down or repeal
DADT by adding amendments to the Defense Authroixation measure, he
was speaking out against them:

Read HERE (http://www.stripes.com/opinion/guest-columns/don-t-turn-back-the-clock-on-repeal-of-dadt-1.143257) 
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on May 17, 2011, 01:04:02 PM
Report: DADT repeal training mostly by-the-book;
but reports find troops not taking repeal seriously

Published: May 16, 2011

http://www.stripes.com/report-dadt-repeal-training-mostly-by-the-book-troops-not-taking-repeal-seriously-1.143757

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on May 17, 2011, 02:43:36 PM
It would be great if it were because it was such old-hat material for the troops, but I fear not.

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on June 21, 2011, 05:17:15 PM
The Sergeant Major of the Marine Corps tells it like it is.

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2011/06/21/straight-talk-from-top-enlisted-marine-on-dont-ask-repeal/?mod=wsj_share_facebook

Quote
“Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution is pretty simple,” he told a group of Marines at a base in South Korea. “It says, ‘Raise an army.’ It says absolutely nothing about race, color, creed, sexual orientation.

“You all joined for a reason: to serve,” he continued. “To protect our nation, right?”

“Yes, sergeant major,” Marines replied.

“How dare we, then, exclude a group of people who want to do the same thing you do right now, something that is honorable and noble?” Sgt. Maj. Barrett continued, raising his voice just a notch. “Right?”

Sgt. Maj. Barrett then described conversations with U.K. troops, who saw a similar ban lifted a decade ago, with little disruption. And to drive the point home, he produced a pocket copy of the Constitution.

“Get over it,” he said. “We’re magnificent, we’re going to continue to be. … Let’s just move on, treat everybody with firmness, fairness, dignity, compassion and respect. Let’s be Marines.”


Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on June 21, 2011, 05:33:46 PM
And some of the comments are fantastic! (Of course there are the usual biblical objections, but fewer than I expected)

Quote
Okay, people. Let’s get something straight here. In terms of rank and authority in the US Marines, it goes like this: God, President, THIS GUY, then everyone else. He’s not an officer, and he can’t give orders to an officer, but if this guy were to tell a general “Jump, sir.”, that general would ask “How high, Sergeant Major!” on the way up.

CHUCK NORRIS addresses this man as “Sergeant Major”, and says “Yes Sergeant Major!” and “No, Sergeant Major!” to whatever he says.

So you civilians can now stop worrying. It has been decided. Obama will now fall smartly in line, and so will the rest of the military.

It Is Done.

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on July 02, 2011, 01:38:55 PM
An astonishing man. One whom I would have loved to have known in real life, though impossible now.

The first openly gay soldier to die in Afghanistan since the lifting of DADT.

http://www.cnn.com/2011/US/07/02/gay.soldier.andrew.wilfahrt/index.html

Quote
Andrew Wilfahrt changed his gait in the weeks before going off to basic training. He walked more upright. He bulked up with weights. He spoke with a deep Robocop voice. He acted "manly."

Through the eyes of his parents, Jeff and Lori, it was all a bit strange.

This was the boy who told them he was gay at 16 after being confronted with exorbitant bills from Internet chat rooms. Who lobbied for gay rights in his high school and escaped the fists of football players when hockey players came to his rescue. Who had the courage to wear pink and green even after his car was spray-painted with "Go Home Fag!"

All his parents ever wanted was for Andrew to be Andrew.

At 29, he sat his mom and dad down at the kitchen table and told them his life was missing camaraderie, brotherhood. "I'm joining the Army," he said.

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on July 17, 2011, 01:41:32 PM

A linnk to a discussion in the NYTimes of how ending “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” will collide with the existence of DOMA, as two separate classes are created in the military. Courage’s Rick Jacobs tells the Times:
"As those numbers grow, unequal treatment of same-sex married couples will become a source of resentment and poor morale, advocates for gay troops assert."

“What’s pretty obvious is that there is going to be a collision soon between an open and integrated military and a federal law that prevents what I consider unit cohesion,” said Rick Jacobs, chairman and founder of the Courage Campaign, an advocacy group for gay men and lesbians in the military. “You will have different people treated very differently.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/17/us/17military.html?hpw


Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: CellarDweller115 on July 17, 2011, 01:42:43 PM
From what I've seen online, a court in SF has decided to reinact DADT, but that openly gay soldiers can't be discharged.

::)
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on July 17, 2011, 02:21:36 PM
There will be a "separate but equal" syndrome in the US Military for some time to come, unfortunately, until the leadership realizes that it's as untenable as racial segregation.

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on July 17, 2011, 02:27:30 PM
On a happier note, 200 mostly active-duty Military personnel participated in yesterday's Pride March in San Diego.

Marine Corps officials said that it was within their rights for Marines to march, just not in uniform. They wore t-shirts indicating their branch of service.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_MILITARY_GAY_PRIDE?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2011-07-16-14-33-54

I'm loving it!!

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on July 18, 2011, 11:30:39 AM
Yes!  Great day for San Diego!  I was glad to see it on the news a couple times yesterday.
I googled some photos and the smiles say it all.  Here's a couple that struck me, though:

(http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6020/5944794302_1b9efcf05a_m_d.jpg)

People don't realize what it does to a person to have to hide--be in the closet--or
else they don't care which is likely for many, but I've always thought that in those
commercials that are done (like they do about marriage equality votes) that they
should actually show the "hurt" of people in distress.  I believe there's a fundamental
decency in people that don't want to see people hurt and they won't vote for
something that hurts people.  Appealing to fairness does not work.  There's a reason
they have commercials appealing for money to end hunger by showing hungry people
or for pet related groups that show animals in distress.  Show gay people in distress
in the commercials.  In any case, people haven't tried it before and the "equal rights'
ads or "fairness" ads or happy peppy notions to do the right thing fall on deaf ears.
I say, equate voting against marriage equality with gay people being beaten or school
bullying or hate crimes...  The other side does it all the time with false notions of the
"children being harmed."  And I don't think it's much of a false notion to equate H8
with their own attitudes.  Anyway, that's my rant.

(http://www.ontopmag.com/images/ArticleImages/military_gay.jpg)
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: lislis on July 22, 2011, 12:37:26 AM
http://news.mobile.msn.com/en-us/articles.aspx?aid=43848297&afid=1

The Pentagon will announce Friday that Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and the Joint Chiefs have certified that the military is ready to end "Don't Ask Don't Tell," the policy preventing gays from openly serving, senior defense officials tell NBC News.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on July 22, 2011, 12:16:00 PM
Though it will still be 60 days after certification that it becomes official.

I guess that appeases the right-wingers somehow.

As long as it has no real effect.

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Sandy on July 22, 2011, 02:25:40 PM
According to Rachel Maddow, the 60-day waiting period was put in at the request of the late senator Bryd (WV). I guess we can't ask him now for his reasoning. Maybe it was to allow time to buy chastity belts just in case someone feared he (or she) would be the object of an unwanted advance.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on July 22, 2011, 03:00:54 PM
Ah. Then it's no holds barred as of 20 September.

Still, the source is a surprise. Maybe he was expressing his dotage.

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: atruant on July 22, 2011, 03:21:05 PM
Methinks the baby steps to date in DADT have finally culminated in a big step for mankind. And womankind..... :D
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on July 22, 2011, 03:50:53 PM
Amen, John!

And the religious right here is getting even crazier, as I'm sure you're hearing being reported up there.

Their desperation is increasing.

Apparently at a rally in NYC next Sunday, the National Organization for Marriage and the Westboro Baptist Church will be joining forces. How appropriate.

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on July 22, 2011, 05:41:37 PM

In the meantime, let's celebrate a little:


DADT REPEAL

(http://www.cbsnews.com/i/tim/2010/12/17/Rainbow-flag_370x278.jpg)

Promise Kept

(http://www.prunejuicemedia.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/Obama-Signs-DADT-Repeal.jpg)

(http://miamiherald.typepad.com/.a/6a00d83451b26169e20153901a16c5970b-pi)
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on July 22, 2011, 05:42:44 PM

(http://davidmixner.typepad.com/.a/6a00d8341c90b153ef014e89dcafa1970d-320wi)

Today, we have taken the final major step toward ending the discriminatory ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ law that undermines our military readiness and violates American principles of fairness and equality.  In accordance with the legislation that I signed into law last December, I have certified and notified Congress that the requirements for repeal have been met.  ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ will end, once and for all, in 60 days—on September 20, 2011.

As Commander in Chief, I have always been confident that our dedicated men and women in uniform would transition to a new policy in an orderly manner that preserves unit cohesion, recruitment, retention and military effectiveness.  Today’s action follows extensive training of our military personnel and certification by Secretary Panetta and Admiral Mullen that our military is ready for repeal.  As of September 20th, service members will no longer be forced to hide who they are in order to serve our country.  Our military will no longer be deprived of the talents and skills of patriotic Americans just because they happen to be gay or lesbian.

I want to commend our civilian and military leadership for moving forward in the careful and deliberate manner that this change requires, especially with our nation at war.  I want to thank all our men and women in uniform, including those who are gay or lesbian, for their professionalism and patriotism during this transition.  Every American can be proud that our extraordinary troops and their families, like earlier generations that have adapted to other changes, will only grow stronger and remain the best fighting force in the world and a reflection of the values of justice and equality that the define us as Americans.


***

On September 20th, 2011, servicemembers can serve openly.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on July 22, 2011, 05:44:31 PM
YES!!!

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on July 22, 2011, 05:58:25 PM

And speaking of celebrating, Fritz, maybe you could take a trip up north a ways:

Gay Military Weekend Kicks Off in Rehoboth Beach

With the DADT repeal signed and the 60 day waiting period in effect, what better way is there to enjoy a new set of civil liberties than by shedding those fatigues, spreading a blanket on the beach, and soaking up some sun?   This weekend in Rehoboth Beach, Delaware, Servicemembers United is hosting its first annual Gay Military Weekend. From July 23-24, the most open-minded resort town in the mid-Atlantic will host the gay and lesbian military community for a weekend beach blowout. Things might get so wild that you may have to establish a new “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy on your Saturday night.

Check out more information on the Servicemembers United website:
http://www.servicemembers.org/?page_id=730
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on July 22, 2011, 06:17:41 PM
That would be great, but in this heat wave we're having (the heat index was 121 this afternoon), I'm not leaving the house!

Next week, with temps in the 90's, should feel a lot cooler!

Rehoboth has quite a lot of gay activity. A good place to celebrate. I'm sure the views will be excellent!

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on July 22, 2011, 06:21:32 PM
And what a great website! If I'd known about it before, I had forgotten it. But now I've bookmarked it. Thanks, Lyle!

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on July 23, 2011, 10:37:24 AM

You're welcome!

I do not envy the weather that alot of the country is enduring.  Take care!
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: atruant on July 24, 2011, 01:20:12 PM
Thanks also, Lyle, for the link and your other informative posts. Chuck (mine) has been to Rehoboth Beach in the past and has told me about it.

What a liberating exerience those guys and gals must be having this weekend!! :D Yay!!

Fritz, the heat is starting to dissipate a little here - hopefully soon for you too!
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on July 24, 2011, 01:23:11 PM
Hope so, John! Next weekend I'll be heading toward the northern states (and a tiny slice of Canada, between Minnesota and North Dakota, to get in new county lines, natch!)

Still, Rehoboth must be swinging this weekend!

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: tfferg on August 22, 2011, 10:49:44 PM

'Gay carcass' soldier had post-traumatic stress
Paul Bibby
August 23, 2011

THE soldier who set up a gay-hate Facebook site and threatened to cut a gay officer ''into a hundred pieces'' has avoided jail after a judge found he was suffering from post-traumatic stress suffered while on duty in the Solomon Islands.

Marcus Andrew Georgiou, formerly of the 3rd Commando Regiment, sent an email in March last year to army psychologist Paul Morgan, threatening to break '''every bone in your homosexual body''.

''If the weather permits it I will cut your homosexual carcass into one hundred pieces to feed you to thee [sic] marine life in Botany Bay,'' the email said, according to court documents.

(snip)

Georgiou also set up a Facebook page which used the army insignia as its profile picture and listed five serving members of the army who it claimed were gay, including Major Morgan. Those men had made a ''filthy lifestyle decision'', the page stated.

But yesterday, Sydney Magistrate Carolyn Barkell found that Georgiou had been affected by severe post-traumatic stress and paranoid schizophrenia after seeing a fellow soldier fall to his death during a peacekeeping mission on the Solomon Islands. The court heard that Georgiou, having complained to his commanders that the soldiers should have been wearing helmets when the accident occurred, then came to believe that they and his fellow soldiers were ''out to get him''.

These delusions continued when Georgiou was eventually treated for post-traumatic stress. While in hospital he came to believe that he had been illegally sedated and then sexually assaulted by those charged with his care, including Major Morgan. He later sought help from a psychiatrist who prescribed anti-psychotic medication, but Georgiou had sent the email before this occurred and was not taking his medication consistently when he set up the Facebook page.

Magistrate Barkell, Georgiou's lawyer, and the lawyer for the prosecution, David Nuen, agreed that the best thing for Georgiou was that he be discharged into the care of his doctor for a period of 18 months.

Major Morgan said earlier this year he would almost certainly be forced to leave the ADF as a result of the treatment he received. ''It seems that so many of my colleagues conspired with Marcus Georgiou to start a gay-hate website to drive gays and lesbians from the army, and because so many watched until one person stood up … it may seem that there is a culture of gay hate in the army,'' Major Morgan said

Read more: 20110822-1j70t.html#ixzz1VpADKMT1]http://www.theage.com.au/national/gay-carcass-soldier-had-posttraumatic-stress]20110822-1j70t.html#ixzz1VpADKMT1 (http://www.theage.com.au/national/gay-carcass-soldier-had-posttraumatic-stress)
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on August 26, 2011, 12:55:53 PM

A nice artilce in the current issue of GQ:

TELL: An Intimate History of Gay Men in the MIlitary

This is an article that could be an encyclopedia worth of stories, but it's a
start.  Covers people from WWII to the present.

http://www.gq.com/news-politics/ (http://www.gq.com/news-politics/big-issues/201109/dont-ask-dont-tell-gay-soldiers-military#ixzz1W6PQUzze)

A quote from the article that made me laugh:

Marine #2: "You'd be amazed how gay Marines are when they don't believe there's anyone gay around."

And from my personal mantra of "we are everywhere":

Quote
A Report from the White House
Marine #1: "Since I'm a single officer in the Marine barracks and I've got the highest security clearance you can get, I also serve at the White House in close quarters with President Bush and now President Obama at social events. Very seldom was the president ever alone, but one time the president had said, 'Go and get the vice president,' and all the straphangers went, and the president went in the Blue Room and was just standing there waiting for Biden. And there was no Secret Service around or anything, and I went, 'Fuck it, I'm going to go and talk to the president about "Don't Ask, Don't Tell." ' He was looking out south—there's an incredible view down past the Washington Monument to the Jefferson. And I just stepped in and said, 'Sir?' and he turned around and walks to me and I just started: 'You know, sir, I want to let you know that there are a number of us that work very close to you who appreciate very much what you're doing on "Don't Ask, Don't Tell"—more than you probably realize.' And he was shaking my hand, he looks up and it's like...he got it. I said, 'I want to thank you for this.' And he goes, 'No, I want to thank you. Thank you for your service, and thank you for your courage.' "


Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on September 17, 2011, 02:03:30 PM


70 years later, a welcome change for a Navy veteran
By Adam Bink

Quote
Wrong made right, nearly 70 years later. Amazing.

What an interesting and heartwarming tale:

SAN DIEGO (AP) — Nearly 70 years after expelling Melvin Dwork for being gay, the Navy is changing his discharge from “undesirable” to “honorable” — marking what is believed to be the first time the Pentagon has taken such a step on behalf of a World War II veteran since the repeal of “don’t ask, don’t tell.”

The Navy notified the 89-year-old former corpsman last month that he will now be eligible for the benefits he had long been denied, including medical care.

Dwork spent decades fighting to remove the blot on his record.

“I resented that word ‘undesirable,’” said Dwork, who was expelled in 1944, at the height of the war, and is now a successful interior designer in New York. “That word really stuck in my craw. To me it was a terrible insult. It had to be righted. It’s really worse than ‘dishonorable.’ I think it was the worst word they could have used.”

For Dwork, victory came with a heartbreaking truth: Last year, when the Navy finally released his records, he learned that his name had been given up by his own boyfriend at the time.

The decision to amend his discharge papers was made by the Board for Corrections of Naval Records in Washington. In its Aug. 17 proceedings, obtained by The Associated Press, the board noted that the Navy has undergone a “radical departure” from the outright ban on gays that was in place in 1944. The board pointed out Dwork’s “exemplary period of active duty” and said that changing the terms of his discharge was done “in the interest of justice.”

Navy officials declined to discuss Dwork’s case, citing privacy reasons.

“I think that with the end of ‘don’t ask, don’t tell,’ there is a growing realization within the military that not only gays be allowed to serve openly now but this was probably the wrong policy all along,” said Aaron Belkin, an expert on gays in the U.S. military at the University of California, Los Angeles.

He added: “This illustrates, at least in the case of one person, that the military is trying to set things right.”

The repeal of “don’t ask, don’t tell” officially takes effect Tuesday.

More here:
http://www.prop8trialtracker.com/2011/09/17/70-years-later-a-welcome-change-for-a-navy-veteran/


Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on September 18, 2011, 12:06:50 PM

(http://militarytimes.com/blogs/battle-rattle/files/2011/09/0919cover1.png)

'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' Repeal Countdown: The End Is Near

"We're Gay. Get Over it," stated the cover page of the Marine Corps Times distributed to bases worldwide a week ahead of Tuesday's repeal."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/09/17/dont-ask-dont-tell-repeal_n_967593.html

***

Good summary of the work that remains to be done. This will work in favor of DOMA repeal.

The battles after ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2011/sep/18/the-battles-after-dont-ask-dont-tell/
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on September 18, 2011, 05:29:48 PM
And about the original article in the Marine Corps Times. On the verge of astonishing.

http://militarytimes.com/blogs/battle-rattle/2011/09/13/behind-the-cover-were-gay-get-over-it/

The comments are so reminiscent of the end of segregation in 1948. The arguments never change.

I find this one especially hilarious.

Quote
Hmm…thinking about the ball. What are we to expect? Are gay men allowed to bring their boyfriend, who may not be in the military, and who just may want to wear a gown? This will be one very interesting birthday ball.

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: lislis on September 20, 2011, 12:23:26 AM
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/09/19/national/main20108628.shtml

DUXBURY, Vt. - When Navy Lt. Gary Ross and his partner were searching for a place to get married, they settled on a site in Vermont, in part because the state is in the Eastern time zone.

That way, the two men were able to recite their vows before family and friends at the first possible moment after the formal repeal of the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy. Just after midnight Tuesday, the partners of 11 years were married.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on September 20, 2011, 12:44:42 PM
September 20, 2011

Statement by the President on the Repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell

Today, the discriminatory law known as ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ is finally and formally repealed. As of today, patriotic Americans in uniform will no longer have to lie about who they are in order to serve the country they love. As of today, our armed forces will no longer lose the extraordinary skills and combat experience of so many gay and lesbian service members. And today, as Commander in Chief, I want those who were discharged under this law to know that your country deeply values your service.

I was proud to sign the Repeal Act into law last December because I knew that it would enhance our national security, increase our military readiness, and bring us closer to the principles of equality and fairness that define us as Americans. Today’s achievement is a tribute to all the patriots who fought and marched for change; to Members of Congress, from both parties, who voted for repeal; to our civilian and military leaders who ensured a smooth transition; and to the professionalism of our men and women in uniform who showed that they were ready to move forward together, as one team, to meet the missions we ask of them.

For more than two centuries, we have worked to extend America’s promise to all our citizens. Our armed forces have been both a mirror and a catalyst of that progress, and our troops, including gays and lesbians, have given their lives to defend the freedoms and liberties that we cherish as Americans. Today, every American can be proud that we have taken another great step toward keeping our military the finest in the world and toward fulfilling our nation’s founding ideals.


--President Barack Obama
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on September 20, 2011, 03:07:26 PM
Happy End of DADT! Good riddance!

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on September 20, 2011, 06:55:52 PM
The entire issue of OutServe magazine for 20 September 2011 is available for reading or downloading here:

http://outservemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/OutServeMag_Issue3_092011_Mobile.pdf

It includes the photo essay of 101 Faces of Courage.

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Sandy on September 21, 2011, 01:19:57 PM
And about the original article in the Marine Corps Times. On the verge of astonishing.

http://militarytimes.com/blogs/battle-rattle/2011/09/13/behind-the-cover-were-gay-get-over-it/

The comments are so reminiscent of the end of segregation in 1948. The arguments never change.

I find this one especially hilarious.


The quote was hilarious, especially since the writer thinks all gay men have one (and the same) boyfriend.  ;D

Good riddance to DADT.

<edited for clarity>
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on September 21, 2011, 05:10:02 PM
The clip is a little ways down. Well worth watching.

http://www.advocate.com/News/Daily_News/2011/09/21/The_Daily_Show_Celebrates_Dont_Ask_Don_t_Tell_Repeal/

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on September 21, 2011, 05:44:42 PM
I still can't get over this. I keep on thinking it's all a dream.

Stars and Stripes is an official (I think) publication of the US Armed Forces overseas.

http://www.stripes.com/news/it-s-a-great-day-to-be-gay-says-germany-based-airman-1.155686

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on September 21, 2011, 07:36:50 PM
My mind is still reeling from how fast acceptance is (apparently) coming.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/21/us/marine-recruiters-visit-gay-center-in-oklahoma.html?_r=2&pagewanted=all

Maybe this really is the tipping point, or close to it.

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on September 22, 2011, 10:08:41 AM
I still can't get over this. I keep on thinking it's all a dream.

I know.  Sometimes when you know something like DADT is so inherently wrong and should never have
been instituted in the first place, you don't appreciate it as much when, like last December, the vote to
get rid of it happens, and then when the repeal took effect this week, it just seems like...well finally!
It's only with a little hindsight even you start to appreciate that it's gone...  I don't understand people
who wonder why someone is interested in the DADT repeal or in marriage equality looks at you strangely
because you might not have any interest in being in the military or getting married.  I don't understand
how they cannot see how denying rights and freedoms is an issue that effects everyone, whether you
partake of it or not.

And thanks for all the interesting links.

HBO has a new documentary they've been airing all week called: The Strange History of Don't Ask, Don't Tell
which I got to see at a friend's place.

http://www.hbo.com/documentaries/index.html#/documentaries/the-strange-history-of-dont-ask-dont-tell/index.html
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Nikki on September 23, 2011, 05:03:49 PM

This is terrific news and high time!  I was just wondering: what about the gay service men who were fired during DADT.  I thought someone brought that up recently, but can't remember.  After all, these service people should be reinstated with back pay if they won't to re-up.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on September 23, 2011, 05:20:21 PM
Unfortunately, that won't be the case. Discharged servicemembers may apply to rejoin again, but only under the same conditions as other veterans in reenlisting. No taking into account increased age, or the changing needs of the service since the discharge.

Life is unfair.

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on September 23, 2011, 05:25:40 PM
And of course, the new law doesn't keep certain presidential candidates and their followers from dissing even active duty servicemembers in harm's way.

http://www.ontopmag.com/article.aspx?id=9590&MediaType=1&Category=26

Wouldn't mind at all watching this guy use Rick Santorum as a curling bar.

Put those guns to good use.

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: atruant on September 24, 2011, 07:25:44 AM
Happy End of DADT! Good riddance!

YES!!!
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on September 25, 2011, 01:04:21 PM
Oh, I like this story.

http://edition.cnn.com/2011/09/24/us/dadt-sailor-re-enlists/

He was sworn in for reenlistment by the same (now retired) officer who was forced by DADT to discharge him, but who encouraged him to fight the now defunct policy.

Stories like this give me hope for my country, whereas the political developments do not.

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Marge_Innavera on September 30, 2011, 12:15:40 PM
US: military chaplains may perform same-sex unions

WASHINGTON —
The Pentagon has decided that military chaplains may perform same-sex unions, whether on or off a military installation. The ruling announced Friday by the Pentagon's personnel chief follows the Sept. 20 repeal of a law that had prohibited gays and lesbians from serving openly in the military.

Some members of Congress have objected to military chaplains performing same-sex unions, saying it would violate the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act.

The Pentagon says a military chaplain may officiate at any private ceremony, but isn't required if it would conflict with his or her religious or personal beliefs.

The Pentagon also says Defense Department property may be used for private functions, including religious and other ceremonies such as same-sex unions, as long as it's not prohibited by state or local laws.

http://www.wftv.com/news/ap/us/us-military-chaplains-may-perform-same-sex-unions/nDyCQ/
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on September 30, 2011, 12:37:51 PM

I can't wait to see two military men, in uniform, get married.

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on September 30, 2011, 12:41:42 PM
Neither can I.

It was wonderful to see when the first two male Royal Canadian Mounted Police married in the Academy chapel in Regina.

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on September 30, 2011, 12:49:11 PM
I must admit I'm surprised the decision came so quickly. I thought sure that the decision makers would give it more time, with an education period or similar nonsense, but I'm glad they acted so relatively quickly.

I hope that coverage by the military and civilian press is as neutral or positive as the repeal of DADT.

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on October 01, 2011, 09:03:21 PM
DADT Repealed: Gay Active-Duty Servicemembers Wear Uniforms At Human Rights Campaign Dinner

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/01/dadt-repealed-gay-servicemembers-uniform_n_990550.html

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on October 02, 2011, 12:26:38 PM
The news is getting more wonderful all the time, at least in terms of the US Armed Forces.

http://miamiherald.typepad.com/nakedpolitics/2011/10/uss-spruance-ceremony-leaves-no-doubt-about-end-of-dadt-gay-controversy.html

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on October 03, 2011, 01:22:47 PM
An article in the student newspaper of the University of Houston

http://thedailycougar.com/2011/10/03/criticism-of-dadt-repeal-is-unfounded/

Quote
A parallel can be drawn between the repeal of DADT and the desegregation of the military in the 1940s. This is not to say that discrimination based on race and discrimination based on sexual orientation are the same thing — they are two distinct categories that should not be grouped together. It is in the rhetoric of those who were opposed to the desegregation of the military and those who are in favor of DADT that the similarity can be found.

In 1942, The Navy General Board issued a report on the potential effects of desegregating the military.

“How many white men would choose, of their own accord, that their closest associates in sleeping quarters, at mess, and in a gun’s crew should be of another race? How many would accept such conditions, if required to do so, without resentment and just as a matter of course?” The Navy General Board wrote.

This is similar to the argument many people continue to make against the repeal of DADT, even though a 2010 Pentagon review of the policy found that “the risk of repeal of ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ to overall military effectiveness is low.”

President Harry Truman must have known the same when he issued an executive order in 1948 to desegregate the military. Only 26 percent of Americans at the time were in favor of his decision. The fact that 63 percent of Americans at the time favored the racial segregation of the military indicates that this was social experimentation on the part of Truman — something Santorum thinks is a bad idea. But could you say that this type of social experimentation is wrong?

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on October 03, 2011, 07:16:00 PM
I guess things are getting fairly commonplace.

http://www.queerty.com/military-men-can-now-appear-porn-as-long-as-they-dont-wear-their-entire-uniform-20111003/

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on October 10, 2011, 08:06:46 AM
I'm still getting high hearing about stories like this.

http://www.advocate.com/News/Daily_News/2011/10/10/Marines_Recruit_at_SoCal_Pride_Event/

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on October 10, 2011, 10:47:29 AM

Frityz, I liked this comment on the article you linnked:

Quote
Pablo Romero Bernal · Hartford, Connecticut

I'm a gay man and in a short few hours ill be on my way to Marines bootcamp! proud to become a marine is something I have wanted for a long time!

This young man can hold his head up high and fulfill his dream.
Sounds good to me!  You are right to appreciate these things, Fritz, keep on doing it!



Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on October 10, 2011, 10:59:51 AM
Thank you, Lyle!

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on October 10, 2011, 11:49:49 AM
Naturally, I like this letter.

http://www.oaoa.com/articles/titled-73656-letter-military.html

Quote
But let me be absolutely clear. As a heterosexual former Marine, if I could regain my youth and be so lucky as to serve my country once again as a United States Marine, then my preference would be clear. I would far rather serve with a gay Marine who loves his country than some bigoted misfit who hates some of his fellow Marines because of his own prejudices.

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: gnash on October 11, 2011, 12:17:26 AM
i don't know if this has been posted here yet, my friend sent the link to me the other day:



Telling my dad that I am gay-LIVE

"I called my dad to tell him the hardest thing that gay guys will ever have to say."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DVAgz6iyK6A



not as much drama as i anticipated,,, it went fairly smoothly.  ;) :D
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on October 11, 2011, 03:49:41 PM
He really seemed anxious before the call, but it went reasonably well.

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on October 15, 2011, 08:17:17 AM
Loving it. It sends a thrill up my spine to see a vid of two American military officers walk around hand in hand.

http://www.8newsnow.com/story/15700447/glbt-military-members-meet-in-las-vegas

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: gnash on October 17, 2011, 04:48:41 AM
i get the same feeling, fritz!  all those tom of finland drawings of men in uniform holding hands and cuddling can now be acted out in the flesh! ;)

sadly, it is disgusting to so many straight americans.  :P

iit's gonna take a while before bigots get used to the reality of same sex love, and respect it as much as they respect their own love.

which isn't saying a lot...  sometimes straight people can hate each other so much. it's no wonder they often hate gays with a vengeance. :P

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on October 17, 2011, 05:52:25 PM
All too true, Jimmy.

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on October 22, 2011, 03:26:53 PM
Yay!!!!

http://sdgln.com/causes/2011/10/22/post-dadt-proud-gay-sailor-takes-his-partner-navy-ball

I love this stuff!!

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on October 24, 2011, 12:09:44 PM

The smiles are so big you think they'll explode.  Wonderful to see!
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on October 24, 2011, 03:29:34 PM

This is a coming out story I came across, from a British trooper.  It was from 2009, but I
think it's interesting anyway:

http://www.gr.com/forum/news/119362 (http://www.gossiprocks.com/forum/news/119362-gay-british-soldier-talks-about-coming-out-his-comrades.html)

Trooper Ben Rakestrow, said that since he came out to his squadron a year ago he has
faced nothing but harmless banter from his fellow soldiers.  The 21-year-old, who serves with
2nd Royal Tank Regiment (Egypt Squadron, 2RTR), said it was difficult to start with to reveal
his sexuality in such a high-testosterone environment. "I didn't know how they'd react."

Rakestrow had already come out to his family and close friends. He decided to come out to his
comrades after a night out midway through a training exercise.  He had been out at a nightclub
with a friend who knew he was gay. The next morning his colleagues started asking questions.
"The next morning I arrived for the exercise late, because we'd had a bit to drink," he said. "The
lads all asked if we'd had any luck, then at least our late arrival would have been worth it. I just
said, 'His name was Ryan'. Some of their faces dropped, and asked if I was serious. They couldn't
believe it."


This part makes me laugh:

The trooper said he did not fit any gay stereotypes, although he admits to having a pink quilt cover
decorated with a picture of heartthrob actor Zac Efron in the squadron's temporary digs and a copy
of Attitude magazine often in his rucksack.


(http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2009/12/11/article-1234993-078F2CEA000005DC-966_634x422.jpg)

Heh!  Zac Efron--the new Betty Grable!
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: CellarDweller115 on October 29, 2011, 05:28:33 PM
Congrats To Captian Pete Bennett & Captian Adam Harmon, who got married just 19 days after the repeal of Don't Ask Don't Tell.


(http://i327.photobucket.com/albums/k463/dcfmod/slide_194792_435217_large.jpg)


Adam And Pete: Love In A Time Of War

Max J. Rosenthal


WASHINGTON -- Captain Pete Bennett doesn't remember the time he met his future husband. There wasn't much worth remembering.

It was during his freshman year in 2003, sitting at a table with other West Point cadets, when Adam first spoke to him. Though most West Pointers enter the academy from high school like any other college freshmen, the two were former enlisted soldiers, giving them a bit of common ground.

Adam recalls it well. A former Arabic linguist, he asked Pete what his job had been. But instead of calling it a "job," Adam deployed the in-the-know initials MOS, short for Military Occupational Specialty. It's a basic term familiar to soldiers, but new and bewildering to the younger cadets. One of the 18-year-olds in the room asked Adam what it meant. But the move left Pete unimpressed.

"He rolled his eyes," recalled Adam, "and he looked at me and said, 'That's what people who are in the Army say when they don't know how to make conversation.' And he stood up and left."

"All right," Adam remembers thinking, "well, this guy's a dick."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/27/gay-marriage-army_n_1019813.html#s435149&title=Deployment
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on October 29, 2011, 05:49:14 PM
Yaaaay!!!

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on October 30, 2011, 01:11:44 PM

From that article:

Quote
At Fort Drum, Pete attempted a relationship but struggled with its tough realities.

I lived somewhat near where Fort Drum is and it can be worse than what I imagine
Alaska can be like there.  If going to Syracuse was a step up...!

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Sandy on October 31, 2011, 02:14:05 PM
Actually, Canada is a good deal closer, and they could reached Kingston in 45 minutes. But if you want to go to Montreal,...
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on December 02, 2011, 02:32:42 PM
A Marine captain at his first Marine Corps Birthday ball with his partner. I still can't express how joyous stories like this make me feel.

http://matthewphelps.wordpress.com/2011/12/02/on-marines-equality-and-my-date-to-the-marine-corps-birthday-ball-part-2/

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: CellarDweller115 on December 02, 2011, 04:13:01 PM
A Marine captain at his first Marine Corps Birthday ball with his partner. I still can't express how joyous stories like this make me feel.

Captain Matthew Phelps & Brandon

(http://i327.photobucket.com/albums/k463/dcfmod/img_1130.jpg)
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on December 02, 2011, 04:17:21 PM
A very handsome couple indeed.

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on December 22, 2011, 12:04:05 PM
I saw this story on one of the network news broadcasts last night!

Couple Share First-Ever Same-Sex Traditional Navy Homecoming Kiss
By Zack Ford on Dec 21

http://thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2011/12/21/394344/lesbian-couple-share-first-ever-same-sex-traditional-navy-homecoming-kiss/
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on December 22, 2011, 03:29:19 PM
Fantastic! Love it!

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: dejavu on December 22, 2011, 07:18:36 PM
That's nice to see.   :)
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on December 23, 2011, 12:01:39 PM
But I can't wait to see a couple of burly Navy guys or Marines engaged in a similar kiss! That will give the Religious Right more conniptions than two women kissing.

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: csean97 on December 29, 2011, 11:41:40 AM
Before the movie Top Gun, there was the book Wingmen by "Ensan Case."  Published in 1979, it has become a sought after classic.  Long out of print, it is to be republished by Cheyenne Publications in February 2012.  I highly recommend it.  For reviews and more see

http://dyneslines.blogspot.com/2005/12/ennis-and-jack-in-world-war-ii.html
http://speakitsname.com/2011/05/08/review-wingmen-by-ensan-case/
http://www.ensancase.com/
http://cheyennepublishing.com/
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on December 29, 2011, 01:05:58 PM
Thanks, Lyle! These websites are new to me.

Oops! Thanks, CSean97!

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on December 29, 2011, 01:19:58 PM

Thanks for those links and info...Wingmen was a book mentioned in Allan Berube's
Comng Out Under Fire history and I searched it out and read it in the very early 90's.
To be quite honest, I do not remember much about it for some reason so it may be
worth a second look.

Two other WWII themed stories--have you read or heard of these?

HOLD TIGHT by Christopher Bram (who wrote the book that the film Gods & Monsters was based on.

SHIP'S COMPANY (Lonnie Coleman) is a collection of short stories; a composite of vignettes concerning
the crew of the U.S.S. Nellie Crocker during World War II.  "The Theban Warriors" is a story about
Montgomery, a blatantly unapologetic and unusually self-assured gay sailor who is also a championship
boxer, who woos and wins his ostensibly straight shipmate Barney.

In the links I see you had gotten a response from Ensan Case and people assume that name to be
a pseudonym.  Is it going to be reprinted that way and do you know if he'll write a forward or anything.
(Ensan = Ensign is what I always thought that signified.)  Thanks.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on December 29, 2011, 01:22:50 PM

Moderators--I was just thinking--the title of this thread is:
Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military and I
was wondering if it might not be nice to change the thread
title, or start a new one, because DADT is finally history!


Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on December 29, 2011, 01:24:59 PM
Thanks, Lyle! These websites are new to me.

I think you mean "csean97", Fritz!
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on December 29, 2011, 01:34:26 PM
I think you mean "csean97", Fritz!

Yep! Oops!

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: csean97 on December 29, 2011, 02:50:59 PM
SHIP'S COMPANY is a nearly forgotten book worth reading, especially "The Theban Warriors."  I read that story in some anthology (forget the name) and greatly enjoyed it.  HOLD TIGHT is not a book I'm familiar with.

I assume that Wingmen will be reprinted pretty much like the original, but I have suggested that maybe an essay or some such might be worth doing to put it into some historical / literary context.  Case is younger than we thought (as you can read on his website) ... which makes his book even more amazing.  IMO.  If you Google "Wingmen Ensan Case" and then start digging, it seems he is the real deal ... not a WW2 vet, but maybe Vietnam.  His knowledge of aircraft carriers, the rhythms of military life and aviation, all lead me to believe he really does have personal knowledge of those things.  I guess we'll just have to wait and see how much he is willing to reveal!

Incidentally, I have given him a link to this thread, so if he ever shows up here, be kind to him!   :)
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on December 29, 2011, 04:41:29 PM
His knowledge of aircraft carriers, the rhythms of military life and aviation, all lead me to believe he really does have personal knowledge of those things.

Yes, I had thought that, too, when reading the book.  Either that or he really did his
research.  I would never have guessed he wrote it at age 28!  Pretty impressive.
Which means he's only slightly, lol, older than I am!







Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: csean97 on December 29, 2011, 06:39:16 PM
And I'm older than Case is!  LOL!  I can not imagine anyone being able to write something like Wingmen at the tender age of 28.  I've done some creative writing myself, but it's hard.  At least for me.  The "plot" development / the episodic way his story unfolds is something that's completely beyond me.  And keep in mind, Case was writing before the net was even thought of.  So the research one would have to do would have been that much tougher.  My $ is on him having first hand knowledge of most of what he wrote about.  I'm just hugely impressed.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: jim ... on December 31, 2011, 04:55:48 AM
Moderators--I was just thinking--the title of this thread is:
Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military and I
was wondering if it might not be nice to change the thread
title, or start a new one, because DADT is finally history!




Thanks for the suggestion. I'll bring this up to the powers that be!
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: estefue on January 03, 2012, 07:36:07 PM
I don't see why not either other than to keep the historical context.
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: gnash on January 06, 2012, 06:51:52 AM
Just change it to "Do Ask, Do Tell" already..!
Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: Lyle (Mooska) on January 10, 2012, 11:03:56 AM

Remember the Republican debate when a gay soldier was booed?
Matt Baume from AFER has interviewed him.  Here's a preview of the
interview which has not been published yet:

Quote
Remember the Republican debate, when a soldier named Stephen Hill asked Rick Santorum about Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell? Well, this week I spoke to Stephen Hill and his husband, Josh Snyder, about their experience coming out in front of the world, what they thought of Rick’s response, how their relationship’s been affected by Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, and we also got a little gun show. Here’s a few highlights from our conversation, stay tuned for the full interview, coming out later this week.

Stephen: “Immediately I thought, am I in trouble, did I do something wrong? ‘Cause I just got booed on national TV and I’m an active duty serviceman. I’m a soldier. So, that was the next thought. And then of course Rick Santorum’s answer was the next string of emotions. And then after all that was done, I thought oh my God, I just came out to six million people.”

Josh: “I can tell you after dealing with it for a year, and being an Army spouse, it’s not easy. We’ve been on Skype before and a mortar’s gone off, and he’s had to disconnect and, y’know, we lost contact for a few hours. And it’s really kind of weird to think — you’ve got your phone in one hand and I’ve got Skype sitting up on the computer. And I’m just hoping Skype rings first versus the phone. Because God only knows. I mean I’m the first to be contacted ’cause we arranged it from a standpoint of the documentation that you submit with the Army. But technically as a spouse I wouldn’t really be recognized. It was all set up by us.”

Stephen: “I’ve had to run through my house and hide pictures in my own house. Y’know, when soldiers and friends would come over. I’ve had to ask people to leave my house. Y’know, I’ve had to make my roommates lie, I’ve had to do a lot of stuff. And the resentment of that kind of stuff — and the resentment of knowing that for twenty years I’ve fought for my country, and I’ve fought for everybody’s rights except my own. I mean that’s basically what it is. And I have to lie to do that. Y’know, and it just isn’t right.”


Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on January 10, 2012, 03:58:37 PM
One of the state reps in Oklahoma (GOP, natch) wants a bill to exempt the OK National Guard from the repeal of DADT.

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=336&articleid=20120110_16_A5_ULNSbc207963&r=9587

Hope it gets as far as a similar bill in Virginia, which died in committee.

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: fritzkep on January 10, 2012, 04:00:01 PM
Hm, I'd like to see Stephen Hill's gun show.

Title: Re: Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Gays, friends, and the military
Post by: jim ... on January 11, 2012, 04:53:56 AM
Since DADT has been repealed, we've started a new thread for continuing conversation, and locked this thread. We will keep it here for reading and history's sake.




http://www.davecullen.com/forum/index.php?topic=44583.msg2207115#msg2207115