- Pregnancy
- Baby & Toddler
- Parents
- Getting Pregnant
- Baby Names
- Product Reviews
-
Registry
- Community
-
More
Want a personalized experience?
Download the free app
Parenting
What are your thoughts on the "Don't ask Don't tell" policy?
I was just reading an article this morning about it. Here is just a short part from an officer who recently came out:
As an infantry officer, an Iraq combat veteran and a West Point graduate with a degree in Arabic, I refuse to lie to my commanders. I refuse to lie to my peers. I refuse to lie to my subordinates.
As a result, the Army sent a letter discharging me on April 23. The letter is a slap in the face. It is a slap in the face to me and it is a slap in the face to the soldiers who I have commanded and served with over the last decade.
I have served for a decade under "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" -- an immoral policy that forces American soldiers to lie about their sexual orientation. Worse, it forces others to tolerate deception. As I learned at West Point, deception and lies poison a unit and cripple a fighting force.
I know that overturning this policy was one of Obamas running points. I'm just curious if the moms on here have any opinions on this.
This discussion has been closed.
Re: What are your thoughts on the "Don't ask Don't tell" policy?
I think its stupid.
How does someone's sexual orientation affect their ability to defend their nation?
This won't be a surprise to anyone, but I find that policy absolutely abhorrent. ?
To ask people to put their lives on the line, to be willing to sacrifice their lives for their country, but to make them live under a policy that is so disrespectful to who they are as individuals is just disgusting to me.
Aside how utterly stupid the idea of keeping gays out of the military is in the first place, the idea that they have to hide who they are, while being willing to die for a country they love as much as any straight person, is something the military, and all Americans, should be ashamed of, IMO.?
I don't agree with it at all. Why are hetero soldiers able to talk about or have pictures of their significant others, while gay ones are not? It's ridiculous.
Also ridiculous are the argument some would make about the sexual tension a full disclosure policy would cause. Illicit sex among hetero soldiers is rampant.
I worked for the Army when DADT was instituted. Honestly, at the time, I don't think they could have come up with anything better. There was a LOT of anti-gay sentiment in the military. The options were to discharge people who were gay, and proudly and honorably serving their country, or openly recognize gay military members which would have subjected them to harrassment and discrimination.
I think there is less prejudice now in the military, and I would like to think that gay members could serve openly and without discrimination. Frankly I doubt it. Promotions and assignments in the military are very subjective. I can easily see someone who is gay not getting promoted and having their career options limited.
Is DADT a good policy? Nope. But I'm not sure there's a better one in terms of actually protecting people.
My first reaction to Don't Ask, Don't Tell is that it's a horrible, bigoted law. But my DH put it this way. He served with a company full of men (and a few women here and there) and they were close. Like showering together, copping a squat in the middle of the desert, picking each other's noses for fun close. When someone in that close group comes out of the closet, there's almost a mob mentality to shut that person out and ridicule them. It becomes a hostile working environment for everyone, especially the gay person. There are taunts, inapropriate jokes, threats, etc. until NO ONE feels comfortable and it affects the morale of the entire company (which is hard to keep up anyway considering the job they have to do).
I have served for a decade under "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" -- an immoral policy that forces American soldiers to lie about their sexual orientation. Worse, it forces others to tolerate deception.
My problem with this statement is that it assumes that someone is asking and you have to lie about your sexual orientation. The first part of the policy is Don't Ask. If someone is asking, they are violating the policy as much as a person 'telling' or coming out and they should be punished as well.
My stance on homosexuality is that it is YOUR BUSINESS. In real life, we should follow a similar Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy because it is no one's business but yours what you do in the privacy of your own bedroom. I don't tell you about my escapades with my DH, don't tell me about yours.
ETA: I don't think the policy of discharging openly gay soldiers is right, though. I do think it might warrant reassigning that soldier to protect him/her and the unity of the company.
Starr_Mom, what if people who had kids weren't allowed in the military, but if you were okay denying the existence of your children, they'd let you in? Would you be willing to deny that you're a mother? ?That you have children who love you and whom you love? ?Would you be willing to sacrifice that part of your identity so that people wouldn't ridicule and humiliate you? ?
Asking homosexuals to not be openly and safely homosexuals IS asking them to lie. ?
This is kind of my feeling as well. In the military, you life may depend on the people you work with. If your fellow soldiers are uncomfortable with you, for whatever reason, are they going to risk their lives to save you? If the morale of the entire company is affected, it puts the lives of everyone in danger.
See, the point is that they are not supposed to ask. They don't give a rat's a$$ if you have kids or not, so they don't ask. So I would not have to deny or confirm anything if I don't want to.
And until EVERYONE changes their views on homosexuality, I don't know that they could ever be safe in an environment like the military.
Not to make a generalization, but then the military would be severly shorted.
Well, it wasn't too long ago that women weren't allowed in the military, and when they were they were discharged if they got pregnant. The military openly discriminates against lots of people -- the handicapped, old people, fat people, people who are deemed too short or who have certain diseases. We have an all-volunteer military and people are able to choose whether they want to serve under the policies in place.
I agree it shouldn't matter if someone is gay, but in the reality of military life it does. People shouldn't have to hide their identity, but many many people choose to do so or are required to do so whether they are in the military or not because of discrimination. While the military policy is written, lots of places of employment have unwritten rules that gays can't be open about their sexual orientation as well. You see the same thing in churches, schools, etc.
I think that if you're caught being a hateful bigot or homophobe you should be discharged, personally.
I find that mentality to be gross. How is bigotry indulged SO suportively? I think it is ridiculous, and and if you are ( as a soldier) going to be uncomfortable serving with ANY kind of person- then the military is NOT FOR YOU...
Shame on america for allowing this hillbilly mentality to keep being fostered!
Idealistically I agree with you. But this would be difficult to put into practice with the realities of the military chain of command. If I had never worked/lived in a military environment, I would agree with you. But any policy has to work with the current culture.
I'm not honestly suggesting that they do that, but nothing changes if everything stays the same. Is it ok for the military to always be this way?
Nope. I think the way that things work in the military are disgusting. My DH struggled because he wasn't one of the 'cool kids' and he deserved a lot more than he got. And I'm not saying that we shouldn't do anything to fight the unfairness and hatred. I'm just saying that there's a reason that policy is in place and while I don't agree with it, I have to support it. I care deeply about all of our friends who are still in harm's way and if anything distracts from the mission at hand and keeping everyone alive, I have to think that that falls to the wayside. It's about fighting for our country and bringing people home alive. All the other stuff is just semantics.
The military won't always be this way. Socially, the military has historically be ahead of the rest of society in a lot of ways. The military was desegrated before other areas of society. They integrated women into the service before a lot of private sector areas did. They aren't perfect, but they aren't horrible either.
Hey! we said the same thing!!
Only I honestly DO think they should implement it- current military culture be damned! The bigots had to find a way to deal whenever thos dang coloreds got to start a-votin' .
things evolve- military ape men can too. it might be really hard for them, but if they'd like to be paid for a government job and benefits, then they might just have to start acting like civilized humans....oh the pity.
I understand where you are coming from but if we have to wait until a time when we are not engaged in any kind of active war we might be waiting a long time. And I disagree w/ the idea that it is just semantics. Your DH is fighting for his family and for all of us. A gay soldier doesn't have the right to even have a "family" let alone fight for them.
BOF, I love you. You should go and whoop their a$$es into shape.
The Army didn't care about me or my son at home while DH was in Afghanistan. To them, we WERE just semantics.
Your "hateful bigotry" is how the majority of the country feels if you look at voting trends on gay marriage and cultural research on homosexuals. Of course it's not right, but this is the country we live in right now. You can't mandate people's feelings, and at some point you have to settle for keeping people safe while society evolves. The bottom line is policy of any kind is imperfect, but it is designed to give as many rights as possible to as many people while still maintaining the ability to accomplish a mission.
Morale is a vital part of the military accomplishing its mission. Look at the military just after Vietnam, which was barely functioning. If the military were to kick out anyone with bigoted views on homosexuality, the military would be gutted and the draft would be reinstated. Is that better than "don't ask don't tell"?
well- not necessarily- I am saying the don't ask don't tell policy should be applied to bigots- there are gays in the military ( lots!) but they can't speak up, and mostly do not. Do you think that if the mandate were applied to the bigots, they'd all disappear? nope unfortunately). hopefully they'd just learn to keep themselves in check. AND THEN if they didn't - thye could be punished. And I don't think it would be that hard: don't people join the military to obey stupid rules and regulations? they can just add one to their list : Get up at 0-500 hours, polish you boots, say the pledge, don't use the word f@ ggot, eat eggs, put your hat on a certain way, fight for "freedom" (heh heh)
Ditto every word, Elise.
The Army didn't care about me or my son at home while DH was in Afghanistan. To them, we WERE just semantics.
And that is equally shameful and we should all be working to change that as well!
Agreed! I'm sure that it's much better than when my mom was an Army brat, but DH was married to the Army first, me second. And not by his choice.
I refuse to believe that if active bigotry were extinguished, the military would have to start drafting. IT IS A PAYING JOB. No other jobs allow that kind of BS. People will sign up to be a part of the american machine until it eats itself.
I REfuse to believe that if the a-holes were kept in check the american military would crumble. it is not an integral part of it's running, it is just an indulged shame that it has never had to hide.
BOF, the problem is this: while it pays, it doesn't pay great and people just don't like dying for $18k a year. For years, recruiters have been falling seriously short of their goals and the military is stretched too thin. We see this in the repeat deployments after less than a year of being back in the states. Members of the military are just as or more screwed up than the Vietname vets in terms of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder because there are just not enough of them. Alienating a larger part of the military population would stretch them even farther and may bring the subject of a draft back into the light.
Plus, I keep coming back to the question of who is going to enforce keeping bigots in line. It's the current culture of the military and the leaders are that way as well. You would have to bring in a whole new crop of people to enforce that. Are you willing to do it for $18k a year?
hmmm.. 18k...nope. alhough 18k would go a lot farther if I had no medical or housing expenses.
I don't know...I just think that some institutions need to be stripped down and built back up when they have truly failed- and the military is already failing - clearly if they are doing what they're doing, sh!it is not working.
overhaul of the whole system!! But in the meantime, I think a good step would be to punish the haters rather than the hated. maybe more gays would join up....
You know, I agree with you in theory. But like it or not the military pretty much runs on testosterone, and that's hard to harness. It's not just overt bigotry that is the problem. It's more subtle than that. For example, why do you think there have been so few African American generals over the years? People may not openly discriminate, but they may also not promote someone they don't like, give the best performance reports, or assignments, etc.
No, people don't join the military to obey stupid rules. The stupid rules are part of a bigger system mostly designed to keep people safe. It's all well and good to question authority until you are under fire and depending on the people higher in rank to protect you.
And like it or not, when it comes down to it we NEED the "ape men" guarding our collective a$$es.
We did sort of "strip down the whole system" after Vietnam. It took years to rebuild the military. If the military were "rebuilt" now it would be under a draft. Do you truly think that would be better than what we have now?
18k does go pretty far when you are single, not so much when you have a family to support.
I think that it might be more prudent to reassign people when it becomes a problem rather than discharge them.
I don't mean to say they're all ape men- just that the ones who are should NOT be encouraged.
and no- I don't see still how a no tolerance of the straight white hope mentality rule, so to speak, would lead to a draft situation directly.