Slashdot Mirror


Senate Repeals 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell'

An anonymous reader writes "The Senate and House have now acted to repeal Don't Ask, Don't Tell, [a decision] which President Obama will soon sign into law. While this does not permit homosexuals to openly serve, it does return control of the policy to military leaders after nearly two decades."

23 of 828 comments (clear)

  1. Yea America! by Silpher · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Now get rid of torture and death sentence and you'll upgrade from stone age to bronze age!

    1. Re:Yea America! by assertation · · Score: 5, Funny

      Don't worry, we still have the Christian fundamentalists and the far right to help us catch up to radical Islam in the race back the middle ages.

    2. Re:Yea America! by causality · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yes, but now there is a real ability to protect Gays and Lesbian's and unless we make a huge step backwards, I doubt we will have another president who is homophobic like Reagan or Bush Sr. was.

      "Don't ask, don't tell" is what's being repealed here. I'll mention that this policy came from the Clinton administration. If it is an inherently homophobic policy then Clinton would be the homophobe in question.

      Now, there are a lot of childish people on this site. Childish people don't understand the concept that one can criticize a Democrat without also supporting a Republican. I think understanding that would be against their religion and they are quite devout. Anyway, in the hopes that they'll control their urge to knee-jerk, I'll roll my eyes and explain for their benefit that I'm no defender of Reagan and I am especially no defender of Bush.

      Having said that, I'd like you to help me understand your viewpoint if you would. What is homophobic about "don't ask, don't tell"? Do you believe it is inherently homophobic and no amount of reform could fix that, or do you believe it is inherently neutral but has been implemented in a homophobic manner?

      I never liked Clinton, not just because I have philosophical disagreements with him but also because he is a masterful politician. He always gave me the impression of a master salesman who could talk you into buying things you don't need and cannot afford and make you think that doing it was your own idea. That's a skill that honest people don't need. Yet I am thankful that I don't suffer from the popular need to demonize anything or anyone I don't like, so when I think something he did was a good idea I can say so.

      It seemed to me that "don't ask, don't tell" was a way to reinforce the professionalism of the military. It made it easier for the soldiers to focus on their difficult and dangerous work instead of being distracted by concerns like what consenting adults do behind closed doors. I believe concerns like that have no place on the battlefield. I believe that's true for both homosexuals and heterosexuals. If you believe I am wrong or misguided, can you tell me why?

      --
      It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
    3. Re:Yea America! by lessthan · · Score: 5, Informative

      The simple answer is that the military isn't always on the battlefield and people's lives in the military are significantly more entwined than co-workers at a civilian job. You live with the people you work with. You go to bars with them and get roaring drunk with them. They invite you to their parties and weddings. The bosses make sure everybody has a place to go on Thanksgiving and Christmas. A lot of the time, your co-workers are the only people who speak the same language as you.

      "Don't ask, don't tell" full name is "Don't ask, don't tell, don't harass, don't pursue." Until it was passed, someone could make a complaint to the relevant authority that you were a homosexual and the authority, such as NCIS, was obliged to investigate and determine if, in fact, you were a homosexual. If they believed(not proved) that you were a homosexual, you were then dishonorable discharged, under a special code. The code would show up when your prospective employer checked and would tell them that you were a homosexual. How would an employer react to finding out you were a homosexual pre-nineties?

      "Don't ask, don't tell" was a compromise. It put an end to the proactive investigations, military police searching your room for proof on someone else's word. It did not end the discrimination, for if you were caught doing something homosexual, for example, holding hands or kissing or hanging out in a gay bar (which they, to this day, raid) that person was obligated to testify against you to have you discharged. That is just the legalese version. Have you every talked about your significant other while at work? Can you imagine being forbidden from doing so? Can you imagine meeting everybody's girlfriends and wives, but if you even have the courage to bring yours (which most of the time you don't) you can only introduce yours as "a good friend?" That is what "Don't ask, don't tell" is. It let us homos serve, so long as we act sexless. I'm not saying that we should be allowed to have gay sex on a table in the chow hall during lunch, but it would have been nice to go on a date to a nice restaurant without taking a group of friends as "cover."

      "Don't ask, don't tell" forces gays and lesbians to separate their lives in a way that straights don't worry about. That is why it was homophobic. It averted some persecution, but it gave no freedom.

      --
      Space Shuttle was a program that strapped humans to an explosion and tried to stab through the sky with fire and math
    4. Re:Yea America! by potat0man · · Score: 5, Insightful

      So if there's a guy who can speak a half dozen languages, bench press a buick, and shoot a dime from a mile away, we should kick him out because someone saw him off-base on his off-time holding hands with a guy, and make room for some moron who barely meets the minimum standards but is still preferable because he's heterosexual?

      How does that make for a stronger military?

      How about we keep the over-achieving homosexuals and just ask the immature redneck with no coping skills to get out of the way so that a real man take his place?

  2. The reason this is slashdot worthy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    A protocol with an ask request without a tell response could be considered an early form of udp.

  3. Re:In other (more accurate) words, by Haedrian · · Score: 5, Funny

    My brigade is more fabulous than yours.

  4. Re:Obama achieved something by AmaDaden · · Score: 5, Informative

    Um... http://articles.cnn.com/2010-01-27/politics/obama.gays.military_1_repeal-policy-that-bars-gays-servicemembers-legal-defense-network?_s=PM:POLITICS

    I agree that he did not physically vote for this and he could have done far more but to say this is "no thanks to Obama" is just plain wrong.

  5. Re:In other (more accurate) words, by kramerd · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Its not much of a thought. DADT was implemented because nothing was in the books, so it became an issue when individuals had (for lack of better terms) issues.

    Now that all you do is remove the policy, the same problems will come back, because now there is no policy to say that you cant discriminate.

    You can find similiar problems with the US constitution; historically, we have had to specifically state that women or black people also count. Sadly, there are plenty of places in the US where if those ammendments were not made, they wouldn't.

  6. Re:Obama achieved something by MichaelSmith · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Given the scale of the US political system I am amazed anything gets done at all. I am coming to the view that we would be better off globally with smaller countries and more power given to local authorities. It is possible that population growth has turned formerly manageable nations into unmanageable ones.

  7. Re:Pointless Article by tomhudson · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Nothing to do with technology?

    Let's see. Does the name Alan Turing ring a bell? The same guy who saved more lives in WW2 than anyone else by cracking the german cypher codes was also forced to take female hormones to chemically castrate him to avoid going to jail for being gay (1952).

    The military owes a lot to the gays and lesbians, both civilian and military, who put up with the intolerance and ignorance to serve their country. The military is also the single biggest spender on technology. Any change in military hiring and staffing of this nature is relevant.

    The summary is a bit inaccurate - the military is in fact required to implement the repeal; the actual timetable is set out in the bill, based on certain milestones. So DADT is pretty much dead.

  8. Re:Stupid by SydShamino · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'd rather have the gays in the military than the homophobes. At least then they'd all believe in the freedom they're fighting for.

    --
    It doesn't hurt to be nice.
  9. Re:Stupid by tomhudson · · Score: 5, Informative

    Other countries have gays and lesbians serving openly without problems. Maybe you need better leaders?

  10. It's what you do in a foxhole by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    From personal experience in the military, and from being in a war, I can tell you that you feel close to your buddies and that sexuality is almost non-existent in the sense most people thing about it, when you are in combat. After a few days under fire you just comfort each other however you can, and nobody is self conscious about showing affection to each other, man or women. You just want to do a good job and take care of each other.

  11. Re:In other (more accurate) words, by flyingsquid · · Score: 5, Funny

    The repeal of "don't ask, don't tell" is a disaster from a military standpoint. Just when we finally developed the ability to make our planes invisible to radar, our enemies will be able to track them using gaydar.

  12. Re:This is why the Dems lost the House by vadim_t · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Why is Guantanamo a priority and DADT isn't?

    Unlike the Iraq war, practically speaking, Guantanamo doesn't make a big difference. There are only 174 people there. The biggest benefit to closing it is a "we care about people's rights" angle. Which is an excellent idea, but doesn't DADT fall into the exactly same category? It probably even affects many more people in the practical sense.

  13. Re:Stupid by vaxjo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Are you kidding? What we need is better citizens.

  14. Re:Obama achieved something by Ethanol-fueled · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You must admit that this is not about equal rights, but about about getting more bodies to help blow shit up.

    America is headed toward a state of perpetual war, but still has an all-volunteer force. Nobody would support or comply with another draft.

  15. Happened Before by germansausage · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This same bullshit happened twice already. Negroes in the Army..Oh Noes..its the end!! Women in the Army..our forces are doomed. Openly gay Gays in the Army. There will be a bit of friction and then the Army will adjust OK. Anyhow it's nice to see the bigots are now out and the gays are in.

    Seriously, if somebody wants to pick up a rifle and go defend my cowardly ass, why on earth would I care who they sleep with when they're on leave.

  16. Re:Obama achieved something by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The largest percentage of illegal immigrants (most of whom don't pay taxes)

    That's bogus. They pay sales tax, they pay property tax via rents and the ones who work with fake papers pay income tax via withholding and fica and they don't get refunds or social security. The ones who work under the table make so little that they would probably qualify for the tax credits and other services given to the working poor if they were legit.

  17. Re:In other (more accurate) words, by Opportunist · · Score: 5, Funny

    Sooooo... openly gay soldiers were a security risk and prone to blackmailing, but closed gay soldiers who risk being kicked out of the military should it become known are not...

    I think you need military intelligence to understand that logic.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  18. Re:This is why the Dems lost the House by Eivind · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I indirectly refer to my sexuality at work all the time, like every time I refer to my wife as in, "Yeah, no problem I can stay until 5 today, my wife is getting the kids today."

    Being required to keep your sexuality hidden, basically amounts to a ban on talking of, even indirectly, your private life.

    Are heterosexual soldiers required to completely refrain from making any statement that tags them as heterosexual ? Are they allowed mentioning the wife ?

    It's blatant discrimination to require silence from homosexuals, on topics heterosexuals are free to discuss.

  19. Re:The Clouds is a satire / comedy play by Kirijini · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This paper seems to cover some of that ground: "The Eros of Achilles: Homoerotic Bonding Among Combat Soldiers" by J Laskaris - Transnational Law & Contemporary Problems, 2000 - vol 10 p139 onwards.

    Wow, awesome find.

    First of all, there's a section titled "Mantaming Sparta."

    Second, there is this very interesting passage:

    Jonathan Shay calls attention to our culture's homophobia as inhibiting or preventing combat soldiers from expressing their full grief at the loss of close comrades - a process that he considers essential in preventing post-traumatic stress disorder and states that, ''Veterans need to voice their grief and love for their dead comrades if they are to heal. However, many have learned to keep quiet because of their culture's discomfort with love between men that is so deeply felt."

    That's an aspect of homophobia / "don't ask don't tell" that few think about.