August 11th, 2010
DOD is asking that you return your Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell (DADT) survey results as soon as possible.
I guess there is one aspect of the debate that concerns me more than the others. It seems to be all or nothing. What level of gay is OK?
Regulations have kept, for the most part, the flamboyant, uber-gay person from successfully processing for military service. Currently, the argument is that the DADT gays have been serving honorably, secretly, since the beginning of time so why not let them serve openly?
I am not against that, but, again, what level of gay is OK?
Currently, medically, any history of psychosexual conditions, including but not limited to, transsexualism, exhibitionism, transvestism, voyeurism, and other paraphilias, is disqualifying. Would a repeal of the DADT affect any of those conditions?
Will there have to be changes to the uniform regulations (as they relate to civilian clothing) to make them more gender neutral?
We have standards for the content and position of tattoos, piercings and brandings – will we have to better define what is allowable sexual behavior? Adjust the wording, or outright remove, article 125 of the UCMJ?
With the feedback I have received so far, I can tell I haven’t articulated my position and question very well. So I will post an exchange I had on Facebook that may do a better job than my first attempt;
Kevin: Um, What level of Black is ok? Or level of women is ok? Or level of Irish is ok?
Me: I am questioning behavior, not the fact that someone may be gay. In the military, you can have tattoos, but the content and location is regulated. I do not see a time where a man could cross the brow of a ship in a dress, that type of behavior would have to be considered – would our uniform regulations have to be modified? Kevin, did you read my post?
Kevin: I did. I guess I just don’t get what you’re concerned about? Also, I assume this is all just rhetorical anyways.
Me: Take this instruction as an example http://www.unl.edu/nrotc/reference/UniformReg/Chapter7.pdf If DADT is repealed, then gays can be open about who they may be, but some regulations may keep some of them from “being” who they may be. What changes would affect good order and discipline?
Kevin: So, we’re talking about stereotypes then?
Me: Stereotyping, I don’t think I am. If I was doing that, I wouldn’t think there are various degrees of associated behavior that range from society normal to taking actions on feelings of being trapped in the body of the opposite sex. If DADT was to be repealed, what current regulations in place would need to be examined, and to what degree would changes have to be made?
I am sure I am still out somewhere in right field here, but I hope this sheds a little more light on my question.
This is not something that can be done with the stroke of a pen. Time and careful consideration must be taken to ensure enforceable and fair policies are written.
So many regulations, so many instructions…
Read Comments (4)