OurScene TV – life/style tv for the LGBTQ community

Login | Register

OURscene sounds off

OURscene
sounds off

WTF!?

WTF is the Big Deal With “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”?

11/17/09 :: by JT Blatty

Dbbd09310aa3cdf1ad49ba62be9074156a3de66a_full

I spent six years on active duty in the US Army and as a lesbian, I can assure you that the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy is not a homosexual witch-hunt and it’s really not that big of a deal. Honestly. There are far bigger fish to fry on the gay and lesbian civil rights wish list.

You may not be aware that there are the hundreds of outdated and straight up (no pun intended) ridiculous regulations in the military’s “Uniform Code of Military Justice” (UCMJ). The “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” (DADT) policy is only one of many that need amending. Most military folks are well aware of these silly regulations and just turn a blind eye. For example - it’s a UCMJ violation to have sex in any position other than the missionary. This probably dates back to when?1892?! But really, do you think that code is strongly enforced? The answer is ‘no.’

DADT mandates the discharge of any service member who is openly gay and according to the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network, 13,500 soldiers have been discharged from the military under DADT since 1994. But what do they really mean by “openly gay?” It’s certainly not standing in front of the unit formation and declaring, “I’m gay,” at the top your lungs. That might be enough to open an investigation, but the truth is, there needs to be some hard evidence to actually get you kicked out. I’m talking something along the lines of a very descriptive, pornographic video. Even that might not be enough.

Here’s what it took for four women (out of the total 13,500 discharged) to violate DADT. During a deployment to Iraq, a group of lesbians were engaging in sexual acts in a tent. First of all – gross!  Living conditions during the first rotations into Iraq (especially in the tents) was anything but pleasant. Now to the point - These tents aren’t little private hideaways. Each tent houses between 15 – 30 soldiers with no walls and about 5 feet of space between each cot.  That’s 5 feet of distance and zero of privacy between each bed. These women were having sexual relations in full view of the straight, female soldiers sharing their tent. The straight soldiers were slightly disgruntled by the free show night after night, and eventually they reported it. I would have felt the same way after only the first time. Needless to say, the four women were discharged. There was plenty of evidence against them since they shared the tent with other soldiers. But remember this – the women could have been discharged for the same thing if they were engaging in heterosexual sex. Technically, and statistically, they were discharged for homosexuality. In reality they were removed for being ignorant, disgusting, and screwing right in front of their peers (and probably their supervisors) in a combat zone, which is a violation in and of itself, straight or gay! This is a no-brainer. Their sexual encounters were so public and so frequent that you have to assume these women wanted to be discharged.

Looking for a way out of the service isn’t a new idea. Since 9/11, soldiers have been going to extraordinary measures to find the quickest way out of a deployment including intentional pregnancies and cutting off fingers. Hell, my unit’s chaplain (who was gay, by the way) went AWOL! He ran away with his lover to Canada the night before we left for Iraq. That’s a nice morale booster for the soldiers.

During my time in the Army, a large percentage of the DADT investigations were caused by straight soldiers playing the homosexual card to get out of going overseas.  These guys would go to the extreme, staging photographs and videos of themselves with other men, or maybe even making out in front of their commander. They were using DADT as a potential free ticket out of a deployment.

The military has parades, but it isn’t a place to parade around our sex lives, gay or straight, so if we sign up to serve, it’s not hard to live as a happy gay man or woman when the workday is over. Just don’t have sex on the conference room table, and no packing before PT. Is it that hard?

What the gay and lesbian soldiers DO need, far above abolishing DADT, are the legal rights provided to married couples by the military. Without having the right to marry, removing DADT hardly does a thing. Here’s an example – a lesbian soldier who was serving in Iraq might be informed that her girlfriend (the woman she would have married if she could) was killed in a car accident. The lesbian soldier may be able to serve openly (without DADT), but STILL wouldn’t be afforded the same rights as a legally married solder. Without marriage equality, the lesbian soldier wouldn’t be able to go home because emergency leave is only approved for family members.

The bottom line is – get your priorities in order. Don’t spin your wheels repealing a ridiculous and pointless regulation. Instead, keep your eye on the prize and fight for marriage equality. Without it, we’ll never be out, or equal, in the military or in the rest of America.

11 COMMENTS
Sorry, you must be logged in to leave a comment.

Avatar

DeeG: Wow, I'm not even sure where to start. First..I thank you for your service. Second..thank you for taking the time to write this article. Third through thirty third..I also served, but it was long before DADT. Things were not so different then, the policy was pretty much the same but the standards for discharge were not so high. Almost any hint of homosexuality could get you discharged. And back then we also saw many men and women used that fact to get kicked out when they really were not gay. I agree that one should not openly flaunt their sex lives, whether straight, gay or otherwise, but I strongly disagree that the repeal of DADT is just wheel spinning. To be taken seriously in any aspect of our lives other people have to know we exist. By having to hide our orientation, we also hide our lives..the very life that we want everyone to accept and view as equal. So, while the ultimate goal is to be equal in all matters, repealing DADT is one very important step along the road to that goal. Repeal will not help the lesbian soldier in your example, yet. But think of this, not all gay people wish to marry and why have all gay service members suffer this policy if it can be repealed while fighting for equal rights..it is not either/or.

11/17/09
Avatar

femdemgirl: This policy is ridiculous and wastes our tax money - we spend our money to train soldiers, pay for their education, pay for military housing and then they get discharged for no reason. "An assault on personal liberties" But, conservatives don't want to repeal it because they have their social agenda. This absolutely should come before marriage... Even if we had marriage equality do you really think culture in the military will change? Marriage equality and being allowed to serve openly are two different things. Apples and oranges.

11/18/09
Avatar

lesbocuban: I agree with the author. And I don't understand that one woman's comment where she says "Not all gay people want to marry but all soldiers should have this freedom" or whatever it was she said. I mean, not all gay people want to serve in the military -- nor do all straight people want to marry. But we still support their freedom to do so. Why does everybody have to want something in order for it to be a worthwhile goal? Besides, I have to think that marriage equality impacts more gays and lesbians (not the mention their families and children) than a policy that makes it difficult for a gay person to function in the military. (A separate issue is whether DADT is good for the military -- it means there are fewer good soldiers available for these two wars, and has led to harassment and even torture of soldiers suspected of being gay.) Re femdemgirl's comment: if marriage equality and being allowed to serve openly are two different things, why do you think DADT should "absolutely" come before marriage equality? Personally, I think protecting the children and financial security of gay unions is a higher priority. But if we really have to pick and choose which rights are the easiest to get first -- and apparently we do -- then fine. I'll take a repeal of DADT.

11/18/09
Our_avatar

jt: I felt I needed to elaborate on a few things after reading the comments posted so far, and i appreciate all of the feedback, whether positive or negative. DeeG- thank you very much for the comments, and i can't even imagine what it would have been like to serve before the DADT policy was in place. It is certainly a different time in the military now, where no one wants to boot a good soldier because they are gay. But in regards to the gay service members who do not want to marry and how it affects them? The straight service members who do not want to marry suffer the same issues, and this applies to the civilian sector as well. femdemgirl - they are NOT being discharged for no reason, they are being discharged because they want to, or they are NOT good soldiers. Do you want to waste your tax money retaining soldiers who do not want to serve? Do you think the girls having sex parties during a combat deployment have their priorities straight? That's a waste of my money.

11/18/09
Avatar

unicornwoman: Don't ask don't tell is a violation of our basic first right amendment. Inhibiting gays to talk openly about their lives without severe repercussions in most cases. Straight soldiers enjoy the openness of their family life as should gay and lesbian soldiers. If a soldier would like to keep their family life private, that is a personal decision and should never be forced onto any United States Citizen.

11/18/09
Avatar

LGBTpolicyfreak: DADT is a bad policy, which is why it should be abolished for the reason that our military is using it as a scapegoat. And if you ask my uncle the colonel, he has a different take on "seeking out soldiers." You're right, we do not want to retain soldiers who are not doing their job, but that doesn't justify keeping this policy as a means of easy dismissal. I obviously have never served in the military, but I do certainly get where you are coming from. Its a matter of recruiting as well, they go to the poorest districts recruiting soldiers who want to escape life - when we should be recruiting educated civilians.

11/18/09
Our_avatar

flyer: Please know that your experience is not what every LGBT veteran experiences... http://www.youtube.com/user/LiftTheBan

11/18/09
Our_avatar

ErinKathleen25: Jenn! Erin here. This is really well written, and I enjoyed reading your take. That said,I disagree. Yes, some soldiers certainly use DADT to get out of serving/deploying/etc, but if the policy didn't exist in the first place, that wouldn't happen. (So in that sense, there should be even MORE of an incentive to end DADT.) By suggesting that soldiers using it to get out of duty is wrong, either implies that you think it serves a vital role or need, or isn't important enough to address and abolish at the present time. But if NOW isn't the right time to address it, when will the right time be? Furthermore, I don't think it serves a need. There's no substantial evidence that DADT boosts unit cohesion and morale, so what the heck is it there for? And I don't think the focus should be on it not being a big deal and gays happily serving despite DADT. Regardless of all that, it's an unconstitutional and prejudiced ruling- much like the ones years ago that prevented African Americans from serving. So one can either shrug, say it's not a big deal, and let it stand as is, OR someone can break the silence and stand up for what's right- equal rights for everyone. To me, the issue isn't what's MORE important: Gay marriage or getting rid of DADT. To me, prejudice in any form/law/ruling is wrong and should be spotlighted and destroyed. Silence is acceptance in this case. And, wow, I totally didn't know that I could only have sex missionary style. Good thing I've NEVER broken that law! I'm so standards-on-legs! :) erin

11/18/09
Avatar

Michael @ LeonardMatlovich.com: You could have ground your axe that marriage equality is more important than ending DADT without creating this cluster f--k of hearsay & histrionics that homohating Elaine Donnelly could have written...and WILL soon be quoting I guarantee you. E.g., "During a deployment to Iraq, a group of lesbians were engaging in sexual acts in a tent. ... These women were having sexual relations in full view of the straight, female soldiers...." As the t-shirt said, "With friends like you who needs enemas?" Seriously, how drunk were you when you wrote this? “DADT is not a homosexual witch-hunt.” — Except, of course, when it is. Duh. “it’s really not that big of a deal” — Maybe it’s the booze, but you ludicrously think you've proven this ineffably inane claim by stating [correctly] that the UCMJ’s anti [gay or straight] sodomy statute is now rarely applied as if that’s some kind of reason to ignore your own acknowledgement that 13,500 gay servicemembers have been discharged under DADT [and are likely to disagree]. “[DADT just] need[s] amending” — You don't suggest how, but who should give a flying f--k about such a suggestion anyway? Donnelly again? John McShame? Lindsey Anne Graham? Fred Phelps? “[DADT is a part of the UCMJ]”. — Uh, no, it’s not. “the truth is, there needs to be some hard evidence to actually get you kicked out. I’m talking something along the lines of a very descriptive, pornographic video. Even that might not be enough.” — Uh, no, Sweetie, there doesn’t. “to violate DADT [it took those four women in Iraq] screwing right in front of their peers (and probably their supervisors) in a combat zone” — This is so imbecilic, I trust no one needs my comment. [But remind me to ask my friend Dan Choi whom he had sex with on Rachel Maddow's show to get him kicked out.] “During my time in the Army, a large percentage of the DADT investigations were caused by straight soldiers playing the homosexual card to get out of going overseas. These guys would go to the extreme, staging photographs and videos of themselves with other men, or maybe even making out in front of their commander.” — One would assume that you worked in the Army Judge Advocate General’s office to make such an assertion. But you offer no documentation. And even if you did, it would be irrelevant to the injustice of DADT to gay servicemembers. There’s a lot more drool to mop up but we’ll close with this: “The military has parades, but it isn’t a place to parade around our sex lives, gay or straight, so if we sign up to serve, it’s not hard to live as a happy gay man or woman when the workday is over. Just don’t have sex on the conference room table, and no packing before PT. Is it that hard?” Horseshit, of course, not to mention totally misrepresentative of what DADT demands which is not just that one doesn’t “parade around our sex lives” but not to TELL a LIVING SOUL. It doesn’t demand that we have sex in private but that we be celibate mutes, closeted to EVERYONE in our lives not just the military. Shame on you for trivializing the damage DADT does both to gay servicemembers' lives and our national security. Please get some professional help soon.

11/21/09
Our_avatar

Keori: Speak for yourself, JT. I spent ten years enlisted, quietly in the closet, on a good track to OCS and cryppie or intel officer school. I was outed by a jealous, worthless breeder shipmate after I made E-7 before she did. (If she had decided to actually apply herself to her job rather than have four children, she might have done almost as well as I did.) She went to the most hateful christian, homophobic department head she could find, and made up a story about me sexually harassing her. My department chief didn't want to see me go, but when presented with a witch hunt, he had no choice. He did persuade the command to give me a choice - turn down E-7, get out quietly when my enlistment was up in three months, and keep my education benefits, or do it the hard way. I kept my education bennies, got an honorable discharge, and kissed all that hard work goodbye. All because a worthless, hateful, jealous bitch knew I was an easy target because of a bigoted, discriminatory law. Now it's my partner who gets to serve in silence, and I get to sit at home and watch her PCS overseas where I can't follow. This past year, while she was at the same command I was, that same hateful bitch was in her division, and overheard her mention my name in an innocuous conversation with a friend. She put two and two together, and tried to get my partner investigated just to spite me one more time. Ironically, the only reason it didn't happen was because she finally picked up E-7, three years after I did, and didn't have the time to harangue the CoC about another lesbian in the ranks. DADT gives bigots cover to ruin the lives of decent, hardworking gay troops like me and my partner, for no better reason than spite and hate. It is ruining my life a piece at a time. It's a higher priority for me than any other piece of legislation. Funnily enough, it's also the only LGBT-related legislation that has the most public support; over 70% of voters polled over the last year consistently support it. Repeal of DADT alone won't keep me with my partner when she PCSs; it will take a repeal of DOMA as well to do that. But if we can't get me command sponsorship to join her overseas, at least my partner won't have to be afraid of losing her job when someone discovers that her leave time will be spent with another woman. And, oh yeah, feel free to make love to a Mexican lime cactus.

11/22/09
Avatar

bryonconnolly: Blatty, Thats all well and good. Yes being in the military you have a direct perspective on this issue. However, through my interaction with gays in the military I have found that the fear does exist and is real. I have an associate, his name is John. He is a Major in the Air Force. He specializes in a specific kind of helicopter. He has been in the service for 20 years. On his last visit to Savannah we met for dinner and he broke down during the entree. He is terrified that he will be outed and loose all his pension and benefits. He has served his country for twenty years and daily is in fear of the very thing he protects. If a man or women was to walk into the Times Square recruitment center and say " Im gay and want to enlist." What would the response be? We live in a country that has the founding and most important principle as "All men/women are created equal" If someone was removed from a situation or employment for being black, female, latino, or gay it would be a crime. Yet openly Gay/Lesbian soldiers fear being discharged. Gay military members defend rights, laws and philosophies of this country. They give their lives for the freedom we all dwell in. For this country and military to assume that a gay soldier is less valid, less honorable is simply wrong. Even if it is only one soldier discharged.... it is one too many!

11/24/09
POST COMMENT:
Sorry, you must be logged in to leave a comment.

11.17.09

SCENE•INPRINT / WTF

poll box

MY FIRST CRUSH WAS ON...