From Don't Ask Don' Tell to Do Ask

[sailor]

http://dyn.politico.com/members/forums/thread.cfm?catid=7&subcatid=41&threadid=6406234

IRAQ HOMECOMING: On Feb. 29, President Obama and the First Lady will host an East Room dinner for returning Iraq veterans, with representatives of all ranks, all branches, and every state and territory. Attire will be formal: black tie or dress uniform. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and the Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman, Gen. Martin Dempsey, will attend. More than 100 combat veterans of Iraq will be invited, along with a guest for each, many of whom are expected to also be veterans. The guest list will include wounded warriors, caregivers, and Gold Star families, who have lost a loved one as the result of military service. The list is being assembled by the senior enlisted representative for the five service chiefs, and the goal is a mix that is racially diverse, old and young, gay and straight.

Great way to build resentment and kill careers.

Old and young is easy by selecting a mix of different ranks. Racially diverse is pretty much an automatic with any reasonable choice method which might include medals, random selection or evals across a number of different MOS. Sexual orientation though?

Just what I want - the Master Chief Petty Officer of the Navy calling his Fleet CMDCMs and asking - "Hey Shipmate - who are your best queer Sailors? I mean gay Sailors ... I mean homosexual Sailors ... I mean LGBTQ Sailors ... aw, h311, you know what I mean."

CMDCM replies, "Male or Female."

MCPON sputters, "I don't know. They didn't specify. Does it matter? Can we ask? Fcuk! Someone get me the JAG."

[mandrina]

http://dyn.politico.com/members/forums/thread.cfm?catid=7&subcatid=41&threadid=6406234




Great way to build resentment and kill careers.

Old and young is easy by selecting a mix of different ranks. Racially diverse is pretty much an automatic with any reasonable choice method which might include medals, random selection or evals across a number of different MOS. Sexual orientation though?

wait a minute, soldiers will not be resentful if the best person of color and the best female is selected, but will be if the best gay and lesbian is selected?  Cause that looks like what you're saying.

Lets just not worry about resentment and take the best while male vets.  Chances are at least one of them will be gay, so that will be covered.  Then only the nonwhites, females (lesbian and straight) will be resentful and history shows pretty much that that doesn't matter.

[sailor]

wait a minute, soldiers will not be resentful if the best person of color and the best female is selected, but will be if the best gay and lesbian is selected?  Cause that looks like what you're saying.

Lets just not worry about resentment and take the best while male vets.  Chances are at least one of them will be gay, so that will be covered.  Then only the nonwhites, females (lesbian and straight) will be resentful and history shows pretty much that that doesn't matter.

 
Without asking nobody will know if they are gay or not. Since at least one has to be gay, then they have to ask.

And no, they are not going to even try and select the best. That is specifically not a factor, they already have special events for MoH and SotY.

[Inca]

http://dyn.politico.com/members/forums/thread.cfm?catid=7&subcatid=41&threadid=6406234
Great way to build resentment and kill careers.

Who's doing the resentment and why? Why would it lead to destruction of careers? And do you really think an informal continuation of the "don't ask"-part of dadt solves anything? Wouldn't you think it is time the bigots you claim are so abundant in the army should get a warning that they either grow up and deal with it and quit whining, or experience resentment and career endings themselves?

[Micheál]

Who's doing the resentment and why? Why would it lead to destruction of careers? And do you really think an informal continuation of the "don't ask"-part of dadt solves anything? Wouldn't you think it is time the bigots you claim are so abundant in the army should get a warning that they either grow up and deal with it and quit whining, or experience resentment and career endings themselves?

Although I think it's great the military has changed its stance, I doubt much has changed during the last 6 years from what I remember. It may be different elsewhere, but coming from the experience of solely a Marine Infantryman, it's a pretty rough, tribal, and primal male dominated environment with its fair share of idiots(as anywhere else). You kind of have to behave a certain way, and learn to turn things off and on to function as a group unit. It pains me to say, but I can understand people's careers being in jeopardy because of something like this. I've known of a few fine Marines careers cut&black marked in the past when their sexual orientation was discovered. I'm glad things have changed in the military to end that, but I still remember what that environment, and those in head of it were like, and if combat veterans are expected at this event, I'd expect those coming from it to be present. My cover off to those that will.

Ending those bigot's careers would make sense in theory, but that's just not how it works in that environment. Hopefully it's different in other branches&fields. I can't even really describe it, but it's just one of those things that can only be experienced.

[Altair]

Without asking nobody will know if they are gay or not. Since at least one has to be gay, then they have to ask.

Plenty of servicemembers are known to be gay in their units, and have been known "on the down low" for quite some time, even before the end of DADT.

This is a non-issue. Hats off to Obama for inclusiveness.

[Inca]

Ending those bigot's careers would make sense in theory, but that's just not how it works in that environment.

 
Well, yes, that's a bit of a catch22 isn't it? As long as everyone keeps repeating how that's 'just not how it works' and unwilling to step up to make changes, it's going to stay that way.

I can imagine that gay people might still prefer not to out their preference because they do fear the consequences, and that's sad but fine: it is in every way their choice. (Although it is interesting to note that women or racial minorities don't have the option of not outing.)
But an individual choice is quite different from what sailor was responding to: that the organisation of such an event shouldn't even strive for a mixed set up out of fear of  those bigots and the resentment it may cause. That to me seems awfully close to continuing dadt in a less formal way, and implicitly accepting and even catering to homophobic behavior.

[sailor]

Who's doing the resentment and why? Why would it lead to destruction of careers? And do you really think an informal continuation of the "don't ask"-part of dadt solves anything? Wouldn't you think it is time the bigots you claim are so abundant in the army should get a warning that they either grow up and deal with it and quit whining, or experience resentment and career endings themselves?

 
The resent is going to be now that gays are a special class. They are going to be above the rules, just like we have had in the past with Blacks in the 1970s and women in the 1980s and 1990s.  

At the lower unit levels very few have really cared in decades if their unit buddy was gay or straight. They've known about it, but so long as it didn't effect the unit's discipline it didn't matter where their buddy went off base or outside the unit for sex.

[Inca]

The resent is going to be now that gays are a special class. They are going to be above the rules, just like we have had in the past with Blacks in the 1970s and women in the 1980s and 1990s.

Gays were already a separate class: a class on the kicks if someone important found out about their lives, a class that faced some serious consequences and bullying. It is not about 'being a special class', it is about them becoming a special class that isn't inferior anymore.
It is amazing how freaked out privileged white males can be if they may for one second not be the most privileged in the room. Someone still should tell them to get over it and handle it like adults.

They've known about it, but so long as it didn't effect the unit's discipline it didn't matter where their buddy went off base or outside the unit for sex.

 
Nicely wording it as if it were just about sex. Which btw also gives an elegant way out of this problem: rather than asking for sexual preference, just use information about partners and select same-sex-couples from there. Yes, that leaves out people not currently in relationships for that particular purpose. But well. the selection of families does the same, doesn't it?