Wednesday, May 26, 2010

Why 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' Must Remain In Force

Here's why.

Just the facts... inconvenient but true.


∞ ≠ ø said...

I'm not a fan of don't ask don't tell. It's a timid lying solution to a very frank (heh) and practical problem. While the referenced article is admittedly weak in documentation, the circumstances described are quite actual.

It is a simple fact that most people find homosexuality to be unethical, unclean, socially, and morally unacceptable. The media's constant campaign for the social acceptance of homosexuality has eroded, suppressed, and intimidated many from expressing their ideas regarding this disease openly. I myself view the condition as a disease, or congenital defect. ... No reason for violence or other shameful anti-gay behavior. But a duck is a duck.
Homosexuality is simply not compatible with the military and intelligence services.

There are other ways to serve the country. Imagine... you can't have flat feet, but if you ( fill in this blank ) that's OK. No... it's not. Sorry.

It's been a long time since a musical was made in support of the war effort. (Feel free to imagine titles, themes, and plot synopses.)
Now there's a great way to serve.

Tolerant policy on this subject will hurt morale. Obama doesn't care. First, remember that this guy is a switch hitter, a disgusting pervert. Second and most importantly, remember that he is systematically destroying the U.S. He consistently 'does the wrong thing.' Finally, why expose young people with this affliction to potential harm? Isn’t it a far better thing to be a happy interior decorator than a despised pseudo soldier?

glasnost said...

… don't ask don't tell [is] a timid lying solution…

∞ ≠ ø,
I agree with your comment other than the above contention. I'd also bet that most people who have actually served in the military, including homosexuals, view the don't-ask-don't-tell policy as effective, efficient and fair.

While it is true that "most people find homosexuality to be unethical, unclean, socially, and morally unacceptable", it's the behavior that’s objectionable, not the people afflicted with a propensity for the behavior. Military ethos accepts neither homosexual behavior nor proponents of homosexual behavior, and don't-ask-don't-tell is a reasonable accommodation for homosexuals who wish to make their affliction a non-issue.

Although gut-level values that comprise military ethos do evolve, the process is very slow, hence sudden implementation of a policy where homosexual members may openly declare their condition would be a disaster. On the other hand, rescinding a policy of "reasonable accommodation" that is generally accepted by military members would not be a sensible move either.

∞ ≠ ø said...

That is a lucid, intelligent, well thought-out objection. (My Cousin Vinnie, aka The Marissa Tomé Fashion Show, was just on.) But seriously, well spoken Glasnost.

I wrote timid lying solution harkening to the "timid lying morality" referred to in "Apocalypse n

While on the surface it is easy to see that I would not want my young man (if he were gay) to be exposed to the perils of hazing, or being beaten, or fraged because he chose poorly…. nor would I want my young man (if straight) to be exposed to the perils of being somehow involved in a hazing, or fraging or dealing with the wrath of a rejected suitor.

But it goes much deeper. Don't ask don't tell indicates 1.required secrecy and 2.rejection if the secret is out. The discipline required here is repression of base emotion and physiology. A lie about one's self, and a lie about acceptance of said people for who they are, and fear of encountering the inconvenient truth or letting it slip.

Further complicating this are the factors of youth; some in denial of who they are; some with a desperate need to dominate and hide any perceived weakness. It's a powder keg. Here we are not talking about not being allowed “to write fuck on our airplanes” while killing people is ok. That is a trivial denial of expression contrasted by condoned violence. Here we are talking about the acceptance of rejection of who one is and the need to lie to avoid consequences. This is the meat, the heart of darkness; a true catalyst of anomie. From here, the slip to the loss of all sense of social norms is not only possible, but may be imminent.
It's a set up to fail, and as the article indicated, and I myself have personally witnessed, people fail.

Take Catholic priesthood. Let's just look at pedophilia. Priests don't become priests to fondle kids. Some people run to the church and become ordained to avoid being the horrible beasts that they are, only to find themselves closer to kids than they ever were. So they fail. Their religious ethos, cultivated since childhood, not enough to tame the beast within.
Homosexuals don’t join the military to be gay. They just don’t belong there in the first place. It’s a set up for failure, and a dangerous one at that. I think it already is a disaster.