Can you justify the "don't ask, don't tell" policy of the military in the U.S.?

It is unjustifiable, but it was rationalized during the Clinton presidency as a “compromise” when it was, of course, cowardice.

No you can not. Absolutely not! For any number of reasons, moral, judicial, ethical, logical and what have you.

It is an affront to let people kill and die for their country, and at the same time say that they are not allowed to disclose their sexual preference (if they are gay, otherwise it’s apparently fine). If you put your life on the line for your country you should get respect – who fucking cares about your sexual preferences?!?

Sexuality has no place in the workplace, period.

If sex between men in the military is found it should be punished without any consideration as to the participants genders.

I don’t think you can ever justify implementing and enforcing a policy which requires people to hide who they are. Ever.

No, and I would never try. Nor do I think anyone can come up with a viable justification. “Don’t Ask Don’t, Don’t Tell” forces people to live in secrecy and fear. It creates an “us v. them” mentality. It is institutionalized discrimination.

However, being in the military is 100% a choice. You do not go into the military ignorant of its policies. The armed services are dangerous for women and those of LGBT persuasion. It’s hard for me to sympathize with those who have negative experiences in the military because if they had not chosen to be there, maybe such atrocities would not have occurred.

You really can’t. It has created an incredible amount of blackmail and drama within the military, and serves no purpose other than to appease those who feel that other people’s choices consensual sexual should be regulated and punished.

You can somewhat. There is no place in the military for sex during active duty, It could cause issues that need not be there. This is why men and women live in separate quarters. If an openly gay man joined the military, where would he sleep?

The don’t ask don’t tell policy gives gay men a choice to ignore their sexuality for a little bit and do what they want to do, join the military.

I have nothing against gay people, its just that being attracted to the same sex poses problems for the military and this is the best way to solve it.

@jackm Men and women don’t have separate quarters always. Additionally, who says where people sleep has anything to do with where and when they have sex.

Under your rubric, there just shouldn’t be gays in the military. Don’t Ask Don’t Tell doesn’t say that- it says that people shouldn’t be openly gay.

What is it about gay men and lesbian women that makes you think they will act with any less decorum than other soldiers?

Men and women only don’t have separate quarters under special circumstances. Even married soldiers usually don’t sleep together.

I am not saying that gay man will have sex with any men whenever, I am just saying that following from the rules the army previously had about men and women, they should have similar rules about men and gay men.

So following this logic gay men shouldn’t be allowed to sleep with other men. But the army was nice and said if you can keep it under control, go ahead and just do your duty, we won’t intervene unless you prove to us we should.

Maybe I’m alone here, but I don’t see a big problem with it… I guess because I view the policy as just a way of keeping personal issues out of the workplace (and their work is very serious!). To me it’s no different than an employer not wanting his workers to talk about their personal life while at work. Just leave the personal stuff out as much as possible. I think it is not intended to harm homosexuals in the military but rather protect them. As wrong as it may be, the truth is that there are still a LOT of men out there that would be uncomfortable at the very least to be sleeping and dressing in close quarters with a homosexual male. The policy is just a way to relieve any pressure, stress, or division within the troops.

@BBSDTfamily: You took the words right out of my mouth. While I disagree that it is illegal for gays to join the military, I think that sexuality should not be discussed at all. I think that perhaps don’t as don’t tell is kind of sloppy, but the basic premise of preventing discussion about sexuality is not bad.

To say that one needs to keep their sexuality out of the workplace just goes to show you what a heterocentric culture we live in. Anytime someone says my wife/husband they announce their sexuality. Your wedding rings, the pictures on your desks, the terms fiance, anniversary, all denote your heterosexuality. You want to make gay invisible. Well, sorry I call bullshit. I will talk about my wife, I will display her picture and tell people we are celebrating our anniversary.

No work place is personal life free. I have an office with 13 people in it. We are all up in each others’ business. We are friends, a little family. Even if you work in a large corporation, there are those close to you that you confide in.

I don’t care if it’s uncomfortable, until gay relationships are given the same respect and rights that heterosexual couples receive, gay people are going to be coming out. It’s are biggest survival tool.

@tinyfaery I see your point, but just because gay people keep coming out does not mean everyone is going to give them equal respect.

@tinyfaery Thanks for reminding people who needed reminding. GA.

@BBSDTfamily Yeah, but there’s a different between granting equally respect and ending someone’s career because, say, some other soldier with a personal vendetta suspects them, does a whole hell of a lot of research into that person’s private life specifically to find evidence of their homosexuality, out them to their superiors, and drum them out of the military, which has happened a non-trivial amount of times.

Again, what is it about being gay that makes someone unfit to serve, or unprofessional in their conduct?

Why is it that the US is the only western democracy with this rule? Or are there other countries in the west with similar practices?

@aphilotus Why are you asking me what it is about being gay makes someone unfit to serve or unprofessional? I never said that nor do I think it. But I did say that it can make straight men feel uncomfortable living in close quarters with a homosexual man… the same way a woman uncomfortable living in close quarters with a straight man. So I think it is obvious that “don’t ask don’t tell” protects gay men from any negative actions that would result from someone in their group finding out they are gay. I think they should be able to serve in the military just like everyone else, and I don’t really care if the policy is lifted or not. I’m just saying that I don’t think it’s some evil ploy to hurt gays like some in this thread seem to imply. I think it was made with good intentions but just like everything else can be twisted to fit other people’s ill intentions.

@BBSDTfamily How does it protect gay men? It pretty expressly doesn’t. There have been a lot more cases of it being used to blackmail gay servicemen than the law has been used to protect their right to serve.

And so what if it it makes straight men uncomfortable. Black people make some white people uncomfortable, and we let all races serve in the military.

If I told you that I was uncomfortable with the black guy I had to bunk near because I thought he was “soiling me” with his presence and was going to screw up my sex life by “stealing my women”, you’d call me a crazy racist who is needlessly frightened by another man’s sexuality. I’d be the one with consequences. But if I told you he was gay and that made me uncomfortable, that would an OK reason to be uncomfortable about his sexuality?

Doesn’t it reflect on the unprofessional nature of straight servicemembers that they can kill people with ease, but cannot handle “the gay”?

Again, what is it about people who are gay that makes them any more frightening than people who are black, or female, or wiccan? What makes being afraid of those people OK?

@aphilotus First of all, I think you should learn that in order to have a conversation with someone you should not put words in their mouth.

The difference in being uncomfortable black vs. white and gay vs. straight is this- if you are a white man uncomfortable of a black man it is because you are racist. If you are a straight man uncomfortable with a gay man could be because you are constantly worried of any advancements the gay man may make towards you. Like I said, the same way a woman would be uncomfortable around a straight man. Troops often sleep, dress, shower, etc. within very close quarters of each other. My example made my reason perfectly obvious so quit saying things like “black people make white people uncomfortable” because it is totally different.

If your issue is that gay men might make passes at straight men, then why would we need a policy that kicks those people out of the military for those actions? Why not use the same rubric that is used for heterosexual harassment in the workplace? Straight servicemembers are totally allowed to have non-sexual references to their sexuality strewn all about- photos from home, wedding rings, etc- why not gay ones?

If a male servicemember is uncomfortably and unprofessionally sexual with a female servicemember, there are processes and systems already in place to deal with such sexual harassment and misconduct. If a male servicemember casually and nonthreateningly remarks as to his preference for the female sex, perhaps by mentioning that he has a wife, there is no consequence, because that is “normal”.

If the situation was with two men, though, the offending gay man is subject not just to the punishments of the sexual harassment law, but can be outright kicked out of the military.

But this is what I find really unfair: if a gay servicemen makes casual, nonthreatening reference to his husband, or his lifepartner, he can be kicked out of the military. Or a female servicewoman proclaims her sexual preference for her own gender, that is grounds for dismissal, but wouldn’t be if she told everyone “Boy, Barrack Obama is a hottie!”

@BBSDTfamily Additionally, what makes the difference between black and white so much different than the difference between gay and straight?

Why is homosexuality such a different strange minority than any other minority (religious, racial, ethnic, etc) when it comes to being comfortable and professional in the workplace?

Why don’t we have a “Don’t look don’t mention” policy regarding people’s skin tones? Or a “don’t pray don’t preach” policy for religion?

@aphilotus I agree that it’s a ridiculous reason for dismissal from the military for an otherwise good service member. The difference in the regular workplace and in the military is that in the military men live in very close quarters with other men and women live with women (most of the time). I think the policy is supposed to promote unity and keep out the possibility of someone feeling any apprehension towards a member of their unit b/c of sexual preference. I think it’s wrong to feel that apprehension, but it does happen. Maybe this policy shouldn’t be removed but changed to make it illegal to dismiss someone for sexual preference but still keep the rule that nobody can force someone to talk about their sexuality if asked. The active military has such an important job that distractions such as stupid uncomfort caused by being around a gay man or woman needs to be avoided. All distractions need to be avoided. In no way do I agree with people treating homosexuals differently, I’m just saying I agree with the idea of keeping that part of their personal life seperate from work b/c it can cause problems (although it shouldn’t)

About a year ago I was watching a movie with a female friend. We fell asleep on the same bed in my RV. She is actually pretty hot. I didn’t try to fuck her. We just passed out and slept and made hash browns in the morning.

Really, people can sleep and shower without wanting to fuck. It isn’t hard.

@aphilotus Like I already said twice, because a straight man could be worried that a gay man living with him may like him, plan to make a move on him, watch him shower, undress, etc. and they would reasonably not expect that out of a straight man. The same way a woman could be very uncomfortable being slightly clothed, sleeping close to, living with, etc. a straight man.

@BBSDTfamily Discomfort is discomfort. Being uncomfortable with someone who admires you platonically and would like to be your good friend is the same as being uncomfortable with a homosexual person because you think they may be attracted to you. There are a million reasons to feel discomfort with someone’s proximity, and they all wind down to this: some people fear perceived or actual differences.

There is no “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy for aspects such as political alignment, food choices (vegan vs. vegetarian vs. avid carnivore, etc.,) religion, all of which can just as easily make people feel uneasy about one another, or result in conflict of opinions. So why is your sexual orientation, which, as @tinyfaery so perfectly summed up, is ever present for heterosexuals, any different from other personal differences?

You said “Just leave the personal stuff out as much as possible.” But becoming a tightly knit group, a cohesive and close unit, is an extremely important part of becoming an effective team. If there were a blanket policy of “Don’t tell me anything about yourself. Don’t ask me about my life. In fact, don’t speak to anyone if it’s not pertaining to training, mission instructions, etc.” you’d be okay with it and not care whether or not it was lifted?

Bottom Line: this policy is about discrimination, and that is not acceptable.

@Beta_Orionis Again, I am not saying that I agree with homosexuals being treated differently. I am saying that it happens. Many people are still uncomfortable at the very least- some even feel hatred, fear, etc.- towards homosexuals. There isn’t a widespread hatred or fear of vegetarians, Christians, Democrats, etc. as there is for homosexuals. Obviously it is a big issue in our country and it wouldn’t be if so many people didn’t feel strongly that it is wrong. If everyone agreed then everyone would already have had equality yesterday. So because of those opinions, it can cause division within military units. This is bad for 2 reasons- 1. these servicemen have to live together and 2. these servicemen need to work together very well under very hazardous circumstances and need to be on their A game. I think our government made this policy to try to alleviate this tension. But just like everything, there are pros and cons to it.

According to a 2006 Zogby International poll (pdf link) of American military personnel, 72% of those who had served with a gay serviceman or servicewoman in their unit responded that that gay person’s presence had positively or neutrally affected their moral.

73% of all servicemembers said they said they felt comfortable having gays present in their units.

One of the cons of the policy:

It has cost the military over $363M over the last decade to train new personnel to replace ones dismissed for their sexual preference.

@BBSDTfamily I never accused you of agreeing that they should be treated differently, but I am curious as to why you think the policy was a good idea to begin with, and don’t care whether it’s lifted.

It keep individuals, unnecessarily, from sharing a particular aspect of themselves, simply to avoid “discomfort or distraction” when the same level of discomfort is possible in many other scenarios.

As for the religious fear, I’d argue that there is indeed fear of non-believers by many religious people. So why is not wanting to work with someone who you think lives life inappropriately by your religious standards, any different then not wanting someone near you who is attracted to his or her own gender?

Similarly, there is seriously widespread animosity between many Democrats and Republicans. What if you’re worried that your Democratic team member will leave you behind somewhere on the field because you’re so adamently Republican?

I’ve known my fair share of vegans who are completely disgusted and uncomfortable with people who eat meat.
.

Both of your numbered points are applicable to situations other than knowledge of someone’s sexuality. Why not the aforementioned blanket policy? Because…
As you said,
“these servicemen have to live together and 2. these servicemen need to work together very well under very hazardous circumstances and need to be on their A game”
which is something that requires good relations, which is facilitated largely by learning about the lives of team members, knowing them personally and thus giving a damn about their lives.
.
.
(Warning: will be using the general male pronoun, not to single out gay men)

One last point: your main argument is that is useful for eliminating discomfort or distraction. So why is it okay for the homosexual members of the group to feel distracted with the fact that they might be dismissed at any point, or for them to feel uncomfortable with not being able to share, worried about someone asking about his life, when he can’t mention his life partner, one of the most important parts of his life? I think that should have some bearing on whether or not you think the policy should stay in place.

@Beta_Orionis I already explained why I think it was meant to help in the first place, and I also already said that maybe the policy should be changed, but not completely gotten rid of.

Don`t ask don`t tell stigmatize homosexuality, it makes it unsafe for gay soldiers to win respect or gain dignity with their peers. It put them at risks of being bullied, beaten up or even killed. There is no such thing as don`t ask don`t tell, it is almost unavoidable for people to learn about their peers and their partners and families. Soldiers can still be suspected of being gay or bisexual or loving a trans women even if they can`t publicly admit their sexuality, tension still exst , the discomfort still exist if that soldier is preceived to be gay or what not by his peers.

I think many heterosexual men interpret homosexual men as wanting to nail anything in pants, and that drives their homophobia. Two primitive stress relievers in times of stress for many men is physical violence and sexual aggression. Don’t ask, don’t tell in a sense is a preservation tactic for safeguarding many fine soldiers against those with overly aggressive tendencies.

@PandoraBoxx But doesn’t regular old sexual harassment law do that? Why this draconian need for homosexuals to never mention their private lives?

Is there something special about gay/lesbian flirtation that is so irresistible that straight soldiers need to be protected from gay passes more than from straight flirting?

Aren’t you outing yourself every time you tell someone that you won’t talk about your private life? Straight people aren’t legally obligated to say nothing, so doesn’t saying “you don’t need to know that” beg the question in your squadmate’s minds that you might be gay?

In a perfect normal world, I would say you’re right. But it’s a far different thing for people to think you’re gay, than for you to come out and say you’re gay. And saying you’re gay in an environment that is perhaps heavily testosterone and stress filled, where your every action is controlled, is far different than working at the Ford plant and talking about being gay when you’re having a beer with the guys at Buck’s Bar after work.

Lots of people don’t talk about their personal lives or details about their sex lives, and it doesn’t mean that you can conclude they’re gay. One in three women who join the military will be raped by a male soldier. What makes you think that it would be safe for a gay military to out himself in a group of potentially homophobic men?

I just read that 12 000 soldiers have been discharged due to this policy.

The interesting thing is that gays have always been in the military. Not US military, I’m talking back to Spartans, and before.

I am confused, please explain…

Men and women are generally housed separately.
Don’t ask, don’t tell. Allows gays to covertly exist within the military.

To lift the don’t ask, don’t tell policy. Would be the need to accommodate the gay community.
As we have for the hetro community. Gay male and female barracks also.

This is not about the gay person next to me trying to cop a feel in the middle of the evening.
It is about respect and limiting distraction for all sexes.

Otherwise make it all co-ed. Since it is perceived by some as not being a sexual issue.

How is it that gay people in sports teams are not kicked out? Do they have their own locker rooms? Shower separately? Why not embrace open honesty and acceptance and work against bigotry in the US. They are americans who want to serve their country, but can’t cause of fear of sexual preference.

Or maybe it is to protect the precious gay. #

so are you saying gays should have their own washroom too? because it would cause heterosexual men to be uncomfortable to be peeing next to a gay man? The only reason we would need a gay male barrack is to accommodate the fear and discomfort and possibly violent tendencies of some bigots, not about “accommodating” homosexuals.

“The only reason we would need a gay male barrack is to accommodate the fear and discomfort and possibly violent tendencies of some bigots.”
Goes for women too.

Why does it always have to fall into bigotry? How about just respect for others. Why does the gay person expect to have their cake and eat it too?

Is a woman a bigot for not wanting to shower with a man. Or a man not wanting to take a dump next to a woman.
It’s that attitude because, “hey we were along side you all along, what is the difference?”
The difference is now you are exposed, you are not “hiding”. That is great, get out of the closet.
But, because you were peeing next to me before I knew you were gay it should not matter? I do not get that logic.
Don’t get we wrong. We are adults got to pee got to pee. But it is about respect.
Otherwise if you feel it is bigotry. Hey, I am with you! It is bigotry for women and men to have different barracks and washrooms.
Period.

Look straight guys, you are not all that. Not all men want to sleep with you. When male officers see any female officer are they distracted or horny? What makes you think that gay men can’t put their libido aside for a greater purpose. Trust me. You are not irresistible. Gay men usually have higher standards than the typical military man. Or is that the problem? Are you scared a gay man won’t find you attractive and want nothing to do with you? Hmm…

“When male officers see any female officer are they distracted or horny?”

Sometimes, Yes.

That has nothing to do with it. Get over yourself.

Answer this. Why are men and women kept separate?

@tinyfairy ‘s remark reminds me how homosexuals assume straights assume all homosexuals want them. Sad.

Also, her earlier comment proves she doesn’t understand the difference between sexual behavior in the workplace and evidence of ones sexlife outside work displayed in the workplace.