https://buy-zithromax.online buy kamagra usa https://antibiotics.top buy stromectol online https://deutschland-doxycycline.com https://ivermectin-apotheke.com kaufen cialis https://2-pharmaceuticals.com buy antibiotics online Online Pharmacy vermectin apotheke buy stromectol europe buy zithromax online https://kaufen-cialis.com levitra usa https://stromectol-apotheke.com buy doxycycline online https://buy-ivermectin.online https://stromectol-europe.com stromectol apotheke https://buyamoxil24x7.online deutschland doxycycline https://buy-stromectol.online https://doxycycline365.online https://levitra-usa.com buy ivermectin online buy amoxil online https://buykamagrausa.net

Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, Finally Falls

Well, with all the commentary I’ve done over the past several weeks / months about DADT, I suppose I should say something about its going down to defeat in Congress yesterday.

But, honestly, with all that commentary, it seems almost anticlimactic.

DADT was a compromise after the Clinton Administration bloodied its nose tackling gays in the military first thing out the chute.  I don’t know, in retrospect, if it was just too soon, or if it came across too forcefully, but overturning the military’s explicit ban on homosexuality just ran into too big of a roadblock.

So we ended up with a compromise.  Compromise is good right?

This compromise wasn’t.  Because it wasn’t based on folks getting a bit of what they wanted, and acknowledging what that everyone had to get something. This compromise was based on a lie.

The lie was, “We won’t ask if you’re gay. You don’t tell us you’re gay. And, through this mutual lie, we’ll live in quiet harmony.”

As most of us learn over the years, basing a relationship — whether a love affair or a career — on a lie rarely ends well.  The person who is explicitly lying — in this case, a gay member of the military — has to worry constantly that their secret will come out, or that, even if it’s known to some trusted friends, it will someday leak to ears that cannot or will not officially ignore it, and their career will be over.

That the policy was used by some to continue witch hunts after covert gays, or was used as a way to exact revenge, or blackmail, made it all the worse.

But gays weren’t the only ones being asked to lie.  The military itself, officially and as a culture, was built up on turning a blind eye to homosexuality — unless it became too officially noticed to ignore.  They had to not ask — and so could pretend that it didn’t exist.

And yet, the military has a fetish about honor, about honesty, about truth.  Look at the West Point Honor Code:

a. The Cadet Honor Code is defined as “A cadet will not lie, cheat, steal, or tolerate those who do.” The Honor Code expresses four succinct prohibitions. On a behavioral level, the Code represents a simple standard for all cadets. On a developmental plane, West Point expects that all cadets will strive to live far above the minimum standard of behavior and develop a commitment to ethical principles guiding moral actions.
b. West Point’s core mission is develop leaders of character for our Army. A leader of character knows what is right, and possesses the moral courage to act on that knowledge. The principles of truthfulness, fairness, respect for others, and a personal commitment to maintaining values constitute that fundamental ideal known as the Spirit of the Code. A leader of character will apply the Spirit of the Code when making decisions involving ethical dilemmas.

So we have codes for honor, for truth, for not lying … and yet, we also have a formal policy that rewards people for lying, for hiding the truth — indeed, requires lying if you’re gay and want to serve.  And if someone learns that you’re gay, then they, too, end up having to decide whether to “tolerate” that lie (and lie themselves).

How could we ask for honorable conduct from anyone based on such a policy? The compromise was, itself, compromising.

Further, the lie allowed the military — and society as a whole — to ignore gay people. To pretend they didn’t exist.  They still hit the news in the meantime — another Arabic translator booted out, a decorated airman, a soldier drummed out of the military having been caught offbase holding the wrong gender’s hand. We knew they were there, but ordinarily we and they could pretend they weren’t.

DADT was built on lying.  And, as such, it could not stand.  It would have been better to simply continue the old policy until society recognized it for the injustice it was.  DADT allowed a lie to release the pressure for change, and so allowed the injustice to coninue longer.

This isn’t the end of it, of course.  There’s still work for equality and justice to come.  Even after the president signs the bill, it will all be contingent on planning, dealing with what are seen as fairly thorny issues in some areas. Showering. Bunking. How to address cohabitation. This will be further complicated by (doubtless) law suits. And efforts, I suspect, by some in the next congress to “defund” any efforts around this.  The Federal Defense of Marriage Act will no doubt be dragged into the fray.  And, in the services, some will drag their feet and hold out for more transition time and come up with an endless array of excuses as to why they can’t possibly enact this policy change any time soon.

And, of course, there will be Incidents.  Most soldiers will, I suspect, have no problems with it, but there will be some that don’t, just as there was in the racially integrated armed forces (in some cases, to this day).  And there will be COs that tolerate such Incidents because they don’t think the policy should change.  And there will be those outside the military who take such Incidents and use them to argue that DADT should be reinstated, that the djinn should be stuffed back in the bottle, and we should just go back to living a “comforting” lie.

But I doubt that will happen.  It was already clear the courts were ready to overturn DADT, even the legislature didn’t.  Any effort to roll the clock back won’t succeed.  But it will provide some grist for the mill of commentators for years to come.

Ultimately, the Repeal of DADT will be a watershed moment, which is what too many conservative pundits are aware of.  People in the not-too-distant future will wonder what we were thinking with such a misguided policy, driven by such prejudice.  What were we trying to do, and why?

Maybe, by then, gays will be able to return home and marry their sweethearts, too.

103 view(s)  

One thought on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, Finally Falls”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *