DADT: Now what

1.  Bruce Kesler looks at the ramifications of the repeal of DADT.

2.  The Ivy Leagues say they’ll allow military recruiters back on campus (which at least ends their hypocrisy of taking federal feds but denying the feds access).  See here and here.  I wonder if that will have a measurable effect on future recruitment.

Be Sociable, Share!

Comments

  1. Kirk Strong says

    As a former soldier, I would not have minded if a few of the guys in my platoon were openly gay so long as they didn’t make a big deal out of it and kept their sexual activities private.  I think that willingness to do one’s duty, to be courageous and trustworthy in life-threatening situations, and to support other members of the team when needed are far more important than sexual orientation.  These are the essential traits of good soldiers.  None of them are unique to heterosexuals.

  2. says

    LOL.  Really?  So being intimate with a fellow Marine and wondering if he might be gay is somehow better than being intimate with a fellow Marine and then finding out later that he is gay?  Or knowing he was gay all along?  Being straight does not have an effect on my ability to trust or rely on a fellow gay soldier, being homophobic does.
    Men in tough situations need to be able to look each other in the eye and grab each other by the ears, or the collar, or the pecks (or the balls in ancient Rome) and take the mettle of the man!!!… and that includes knowing that the guy is not a homophobe.

  3. Spartacus says

    Well, now Barack will have to leave all those combat troops in Afghanistan for another couple of years: he needs their ballots to follow a slow, circuitous, obsolescent and failure-prone route back to their local precincts in 2012.  [sigh]  It’s such a tough thing to maintain voter intensity on one’s own side while suppressing it amongst one’s enemies.

  4. spiff580 says

    I would guess that, on the ground, not much will change.  Gays who are already serving, will continue to serve and keep their sexual lives private.  I would guess that the “activists” behind this really aren’t all that interested in serving in the military, nor would I expect that they would be able to adapt to military culture anyways.  If openly gay citizens enlist they will either learn to adapt or eventually get released (just like anyone else who is unable to adapt to the military lifestyle).  Serving in the military is about serving in a team; people whose lives are wrapped up in some kind of self identity first have a hard time adapting to the lifestyle regardless of what that identity is (look at the dude who leaked the top secret stuff to Wikileaks for a good example). 
    On the macro level, I have no idea what the unintended consequences will be of forcing through a social experiment on the military while we have troops deployed to combat zones.  I hope for the troops sake that there is very little if any affect to them and what they do. 

    What I kind of find amusing and sad at the same time is a lot of gay’s one and only and most important identity is who they prefer to have sex with.  Sad really for anyone, when you think about it, gay or straight.  In a way I pity them; there is so much more to life than that.
    Spiff

  5. says

    Spiff:

    Your last point is right on the money.  A very large number of my high school friends came out of the closet in the years after graduation.  (I think this was because a lot of my friends came from the arts community in high school.)  I keep up with many of them on facebook, and am constantly surprised by how much their sexual orientation informs everything they do and think:  their politics, social life, jobs, etc., all start in the bedroom.  As you do, I find that limiting.

    This is not about homophobia.  This is about believing that people are more than the sum total of their sexual identity.  But I guess it’s because the gay movement has been coopted by the whole identity politics thing.  One isn’t a brilliant scientist, fabulous gymnast, or fierce warrior who just happens to be gay or black or Hispanic or female.  Instead, one is a gay scientist, a black gymnast or a Hispanic warrior.  Their accomplishments count only if first run through the filter of their label.

    I think the no label movement in politics is stupid.  I do believe that a no label politics in the world of identity politics would be a very good thing.

  6. suek says

    On the plus side, it means that being gay will no longer be an automatic “out” for those who find that they bit off more than they can chew.  On the minus side, I give it less than a year before the “I didn’t get promoted (or I got demoted) because I’m gay” lawsuits begin.  I think the most interesting thing about the situation is that with DADT, pretty much all you had to do was keep your sexuality in your off duty hours if you wanted to stay in the military.  Frankly, I think _all_ sexuality should be kept to off duty hours in any case.
     
    There are still laws on the Military Justice books about sexual behavior, regardless of orientation.  My guess is that these regulations will come into play, and if they do, the political correctness will first require that accusations against homosexuals will be thrown out, and that will result in heterosexuals having grounds to claim discrimination so that _those_ actions will be thrown out.  The result will be an increase in disorder in the ranks.

  7. says

    I don’t underestimate the Left. So while I don’t have a specific mental image in mind of what they are planning, I know it won’t be good.
     
    I also know that when their plans are fully unveiled, a lot of people will have this surprised look on their faces. Like they weren’t expecting it.

Leave a Reply