I think that sadly, until the prejudices against gay people on the outside of the military domain aren’t reduced to acceptable levels (whatever those are), then you can’t really expect it to be much different on the inside of the military domain. In fact, its worse.
Operating under the assumption that what BearNenno’s fellow soldiers say to him in response to this issue is true now (and having served in a combat MOS for five years almost 20 years ago myself and experiencing pretty much the same homophobia), it tells me that not a lot has changed and that DADT is about the best we can do about it at the present time, barring accepting the proposal that the OP has put forth.
Even if what all of Nenno’s fellow soldiers say about gays serving alongside them is a bunch of bullshit (and it seems we all agree on that), it proves that it is on the minds of these soldiers, it is and would be a distraction, a distraction which small unit cohesion I don’t think can or should be asked to bear under extreme combat situations.
So sexual misconduct is also highly pervasive on college campuses. I don’t think most people would deny this. Universities, at least the ones I have spent any time in, have many resources devoted to combatting this problem instead of pretending that it does not exist.
You are aware, presumably, that universities were notably lax in collecting crime data prior to the passage of the Clery Act. So if they are devoting these resources these days, it is in no small part because the government mandates this.
Now, the government is collecting data better in the military on this issue because legislation mandates it - this passed several years ago, per your cite.
And yet, despite the macho and often homophobic culture that prevailed in the militaries of many other countries, those countries have managed to bring gay men and women into the forces with barely a hiccup.
So i’ll ask again: Why won’t it work here? Are American soldiers simply dumber, more bigoted, and less professional than soldiers in other Western democracies? Are Americans in general dumber and more bigoted? Does American culture and politics really have more in common with Syria and Iran and North Korea and China than it does with Canada and Australia and the UK and Spain?
So once again bigotry becomes its own reward. As long as soldiers act like a bunch of narow-minded assholes, we reward them by giving them what they want.
Fuck that.
We keeping getting told that the American soldier is a professional. Well, let him prove it. When the brass gives the orders, let’s see if these rednecks know how to follow them. And if they don’t, then dishonorably discharge them.
Convincing the brass is the first big step. I’m not as worried about the soldiers doing what they’re told. They will complain and make jokes and it will take some getting used to, but they will handle it.
But many high ranking officials in positions to affect new policy actually share the same views as these soldiers. So convincing them to do the right thing by creating a new policy that fully integrates homosexuals across the entire military will be harder than convincing the soldiers to simply do what they’re told.
Fortunately, Obama out ranks them all. But all he has said is “repeal DADT”. That still leaves a lot of room for half-assed policy, as we have seen in this thread.
I think the reasons behind your question re: “why won’t it work in the American military?” are many (and possibly excuses). We’re far more conservative and homophobic than many of these other countries that allow for it (with the notable exception of Israel, although I’d like to see stats on the amount of harrasment that goes on within their ranks).
We also don’t have a conscript military. Many other nations do. Volunteer militaries aren’t necessarily going to guarantee you the “best and brightest”, especially amongst the enlisted ranks (lack of other real life opportunities). Heck, it wasn’t that long ago where military service was doled out by a judge as a replacement for incarceration for crimes!
I don’t want to try to excuse homophobia. I feel like I am sounding like I am. Perhaps ramrodding (heh) a new set of rules down everyone’s throats is the only way to make it work. Maybe baby steps are needed as BearNenno’s OP suggests, especially in light of the fact of how slow our government and military are to not only accept change but to enact it.
What does any of this have to do with the price of tea in China? A claim was made that sexual misconduct is a problem in the military. Chessic Sense requested a cite. I provided one, whose data is informed by a Pentagon study. You then made the somewhat unhelpful point that perhaps the military is no worse than the unstructured, un-hierarchical, and undisciplined environment of the American college campus.
Even if that were true, so what? If anything, this result is really shocking: the military, for all of its strictures, is no better at controlling the sexual behavior of its members than your average college. Does the fact that colleges have a problem imply that the military doesn’t? No; the two results are completely independent of each other. Other than defending the military reflexively, I am not sure what you are trying to do here.
I’m sorry - you asserted that universities were devoting resources to tracking and addressing this problem. I was just pointing out that this wasn’t something they took on themselves, by and large.
Also, for as much as the military controls the behavior of its members, it is only in the last generation or so that they gradually tightened controls on things like drinking and sex. There is a vast difference just between my period of active duty in the 1990s and today.
Back then when we hit a port there would be a speech encouraging safety and the buddy system, and our chief would ask us not to pick up hookers but to watch that our shipmates didn’t get rolled. There would be a big bowl of condoms on the quarterdeck so you could help yourself heading out.
Now there is an amendment in the UCMJ barring this - and it is being enforced harshly. This only dates from about 2006, BTW.
The military has a hard time controlling its drunken soldiers that are off duty, even if “off duty” is a technicality in the military as you are supposed to be a soldier 24 hours a day.
This may or may not be true. I don’t really have an opinion either way, nor do I think it is especially relevant. What is relevant is that the Pentagon feels that the military does in fact have a sexual misconduct problem. Whether the magnitude of the problem is greater or less than at a university, a monastery, or a geriatric home seems somewhat beside the point.
Perhaps there would be no rules if there were no problem.
I never said or implied there was no problem - I was just saying that for CBS News to say that the rate of sexual assault was so much less in the civilian community wasn’t a fair comparison - the civilian community does not resemble the military community.
For all intents and purposes, there are no senior citizens on active duty - those few that are are such a rarity that they are safely nonexistent as a statistical matter. The median age for an active duty servicemember is 28 - for the population as a whole it is almost a decade older.
Perhaps it isn’t a fair comparison either to compare the military community with the college community - but it seemed to get the ages closer and in doing so revealed a closer similarity in sexual assault cases.
Just one page ago the main problem, according to you, seemed to be the soldiers:
In that post, your central argument seemed to be that, given the hostility to homosexuals among the regular infantry guys, maybe if we’re going to repeal DADT we also need to set a policy that restricts the extent to which gays can participate in the military.
Now you’re saying, essentially, “Well, if they set the policy, the soldiers will follow it, but the main problem here is the guys at the top.” You’ll forgive me if i seem confused about where you think the real impediment to a full repeal of DADT lies.
If you’re too paranoid to give your opinion, then don’t give it.
I was not looking to set up a “gotcha” with that question. I’m just constantly amazed at how, in a few particular cases, policies in the United States closely resemble the policies of closed, authoritarian, unfree societies, and how, in those cases, the United States is out of step with just about every major country in the free, democratic world.
Gays in the military is one such area; the death penalty is another one that comes to mind.
The question of whether this is result of a vocal minority hijacking American policy, on the one hand, or the result of more general American backwardness, on the other, is something i’ve thought about quite a lot, without arriving at a satisfactory answer.
I don’t think that the death penalty and gays serving in the military are in any way equivalent in terms of defining America as “out of step” with “more enlightened” countries.
I didn’t say “more enlightened” countries, and your use of that term is dishonest because it imputes to me an argument i didn’t make.
I said that, in some areas, policies in the United States are “out of step with just about every major country in the free, democratic world.” That is a fact. It is also a fact that some examples of those policies include gays in the military, and the use of the death penalty. Another area, arguably, would be publicly-funded health care.
