Don't Ask....Don't Tell. Good Policy?

[Sabby]

I'm talking about a straight's "right to privacy" by law.
I served over 22 years so know a little the subject.

[Jeffrey]

Originally Posted by Sabby

I'm talking about a straight's "right to privacy" by law.
I served over 22 years so know a little the subject.

How will their right change if DADT is repealed? They won't be REQUIRED to "come out of the closet."

[Sabby]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Nobody commented, but one reason for repealing the DADT rule is that some people, even straight, can use the excuse of being gay to be discharged from Military service in a war zone

True. I knew a guy that was just "tired" of being in the army. He went to the commander, his platoon leaders, even visited me in my room for a little while. I found out later that he used his "private" visits extorting the commander, that is, he claimed that the commander (and the rest of us he'd met) had used him for sex, and he would go public and rat on the commander as being gay if he wasn't allowed to be discharged. Needless to say, he was allowed to be discharged.

If you don't want to be in the military, don't join. We haven't had the draft since 1973, so noone is being forced to join. I've seen guys try to get out by intentionally staying obese (fat man program) or women not wanting to be deployed get pg, and of course, people outing themselves. If you don't want to honor your enlistment contract or commission, then don't go in. End of story.

[Jeffrey]

Originally Posted by Sabby

True. I knew a guy that was just "tired" of being in the army. He went to the commander, his platoon leaders, even visited me in my room for a little while. I found out later that he used his "private" visits extorting the commander, that is, he claimed that the commander (and the rest of us he'd met) had used him for sex, and he would go public and rat on the commander as being gay if he wasn't allowed to be discharged. Needless to say, he was allowed to be discharged.

If you don't want to be in the military, don't join. We haven't had the draft since 1973, so noone is being forced to join. I've seen guys try to get out by intentionally staying obese (fat man program) or women not wanting to be deployed get pg, and of course, people outing themselves. If you don't want to honor your enlistment contract or commission, then don't go in. End of story.

This is true (at least in Boot Camp) for bed wetters, sleep walkers, depressed individuals/psychotic individuals, etc.. Of course the psychotic pretenders get a field trip to the Psych Ward instead of release papers.

[pelathais]

I just really, really wish that this kind of stuff was none of my business. I liked "Don't ask, don't tell." It sort of set the bar where if everyone acted professionally and behaved like ladies and gentlemen, then none of this would even need to be any of my business.

Speaking of "telling," is that always a good thing for gays?



http://www.voanews.com/english/news/...105447523.html

[Jeffrey]

Originally Posted by pelathais

I just really, really wish that this kind of stuff was none of my business. I liked "Don't ask, don't tell." It sort of set the bar where if everyone acted professionally and behaved like ladies and gentlemen, then none of this would even need to be any of my business.

Speaking of "telling," is that always a good thing for gays?



http://www.voanews.com/english/news/...105447523.html

The issue I see Pel is that a gay soldier has to keep it a secret. Not that they want to make a formal announcement to their flight/batallion/etc, but that they have to live with a secret in fear of getting booted out.

It's not always a good thing, but why is that? At the government level, more is expected of mutual respect.

[Azzan]

Originally Posted by Sabby

DADT is good policy because it retains a requirement of discretion of behavior and maintains (even if it's only a perception) a right to privacy.
That right to privacy is shredded if straights are required to co-mingle, bunk, shower, etc, al with gays.
Example of a violation of a right to privacy is a straight having to shower with a known gay. Of COURSE gays would not have a problem with that, r u kidding?! I said it once and will say it again, the military will have to create barracks and showers for straight men, women and one for gays, but even THAT won't work, because if you offer gays their own barracks or showers it is disparity of treatment, because army regs don't allow guys to shack up with their girlfriends (or vica verca) in the barracks. Eliminating DADT will require the military to be even more politically correct than it was with the Ft Hood shooter. DADT is the best policy we could come up with given the nature of the military environment.
At least with the DADT policy gays can serve, albeit discretely.

Sabby,

I need to point out one thing. You, along with others, are lumping gay men and gay women into one group. Bad assumption. So your conclusion really should be: "the military will have to create barracks and showers for straight men, women and gay men and women". In other words not three seperate units but four.

[coadie]

Originally Posted by Jeffrey

From my friend Coadie:


Apparently Coadie is a real-life therapist, clinical psychologist, something...

Either way, Coadie, are you saying there's monolithic, homogeneous consensus on Sigmund Freud carte blanche in the scientific community? Really??? You may have me on intelligence, but if you say "yes" you better chalk that one up in your "I was wrong" box.

And you have some old Psychology Today magazines from the doctors office?

Psychologists have been laughing about Freud for 40 years.

He was in need of mental care of his own. His daughter was
Anna Freud , the founder of child psychoanalysis, began her career under father's wing. Anna was a lesbian.
She was a product of an unhealthy detachment from her mom.

Anna Freud shacked up with a patient that had become a widow and drove one of the kids into suicide.

For the next 40 years Burlingham’s four children were effectively Anna Freud’s guinea pigs but the world would not know for many decades that her treatment of the Burlingham children was an utter disaster.

http://robertwhiston.wordpress.com/2009/09/01/0013/

[Sabby]

Originally Posted by Jeffrey

How will their right change if DADT is repealed? They won't be REQUIRED to "come out of the closet."

They aren't required NOW to come out of the closet. They have the right to serve so long as they don't OUT themselves causing it to reach "command level" where it has to be addressed. I know the terminology isn't familiar, and that's also part of the problem. The military environment is unlike ANY civilian one. Civilians (especially the the thought/PC police) just don't understand how many issues repealing DADT will have.

We all have a right to privacy to a degree. If a person is openly gay however, and is allowed to serve and live in a communal environment, it will obviously be KNOWN. Most barracks I've been in contain multi-person rooms. It's not like you get your own personal apartment.
DADT repeal will require straights to be uncomfortably close in working and sleeping arrangements that simply don't exist in the civilian world.

On a different track, the military's policies on "conduct detrimental to the service (to include sexual morality)" will have to be modified. Straights will be allowed to have their significant others/girlfriends/hookups in their rooms, showers, bunks, wherever, if gays are offered their own rooms to be housed together. The conduct standard has historically been applied to maintain a level of high morale among men and women that are in a live-in situations without sexual partners. In light of this, DADT repeal is a terrible idea.
Repealing DADT will absolutely create the need to have an open live in situation for every soldier by law, otherwise disparity exists between conduct standards required for gays vs straights.

[Jeffrey]

Originally Posted by Azzan

Sabby,

I need to point out one thing. You, along with others, are lumping gay men and gay women into one group. Bad assumption. So your conclusion really should be: "the military will have to create barracks and showers for straight men, women and gay men and women". In other words not three seperate units but four.

The reality.

How do we get around this? The reason we don't have unisex quarters today is for the safety and privacy of others. What's the "shower solution" (for example)? If the gay man or woman is out about it, wouldn't everyone feel like their privacy is invaded?