DADT repealed

[mmx1]

My non-military friends were shocked to learn that DADT was a work-around for the fact that it is illegal for gays to serve in the military, and that DADT just made the whole gay/straight thing a non-issue in the course of day to day work. You do your job, and no one cares what you do on liberty or leave as long as you don't break the law.

That's utter bullshit. As the law states, homosexuals can serve, they just can't disclose their orientation or commit homosexual acts. Under DADT, you can be prosecuted and discharged for what you do on leave or liberty and that was the sticking point - that the law required homosexuals to actively conceal what they do in their private life. It's a non-issue if you're not gay, but it's an extremely corrosive demand to make of homosexual servicemembers just so we can go about pretending there aren't gays serving next to us.

 

[Floppy_D]

+1 Uncle Fester.

 

[Seafort]

Was asleep during the repeal (other side of the world and all that), but it's about damn time. I supported repeal, and I have to agree that things shouldn't really change that much, if at all. Don't care to know your sexuality, don't want to know. My policy is Don't Know, Don't Care. And that goes for straights as well.

 

[Marine4life]

Honestly, I don't see this causing many problems on the officer side of the house, however, there will be incidents. Where I do see problems occurring is the junior enlisted side. You can't convince me that those who come out, thinking it's perfectly safe for them to do so, will not be alienated by their peers. It's going to happen, the lines will be drawn in the sand, and a once cohesive unit will be divided into halves. Yet more BS for officers and senior enlisted to have to deal with.

 

[Flying Toaster]

On the lighter side, anyone want to speculate the fun some DI will have when the possibility exists some of these questions can be answered "yes."

DI- "Do you suck dicks?"

Recruit- "Sir, yes, sir!"

....

 

[bunk22]

Navy Ball is going to be a bit different, men dancing with each other in uniform. Well, chicks too. Who leads?

 

[CAMike]

Greenlantern330- Per your question- My thoughts.

I believe the majority of people will think this is a non issue. I on the other hand, I think there will be a myriad of new issues created as a result of todays vote.

1. From an administrative perspective- We now have one less issue to deal with on paper. Excellent!

2. From a leadership perspective we've just created many more obstacles in our quest towards effective leadership. Two examples below and I'm not even trying.
a. GUNNY GO! Candidate Schmuckatelli just called this candidate a peterpuffer, What are you going to do about it???
b. from Subordinate to DIVO: You can't give me an "Eval" like this!- You're just mad at me because of my close professional same sex friendship with IT3 Schmuckatelli.

3. From a moral perspective- Our elected leaders just opened a main eductor on the ship and then proceeded to just walked off the brow with handshakes from the folks standing on the pier. The folks on active duty are left to deal with the newly created issues.

You asked.

 

[eas7888]

Will they address sleeping quarters and showers?

Is there really a perfect (or better) way to address it?

 

[Harrier Dude]

Will they address sleeping quarters and showers?

No. That's where the vast majority of the issues are going to come from. It would cost hundreds of millions of dollars to build/renovate barracks and berthing to accommodate more privacy. Not going to happen. I've maintained all along that this is primarily a logistics problem. Logistics problems take tons of money to fix, and they don't prioritize well.

The rest of the issues will be sexual harassment investigations. Like the rest of them, 90+% will be bogus and driven by vindictiveness, but they'll ALL have to be investigated.

 

[insanebikerboy]

So how about Article 125 of the UCMJ? Wouldn't openly admitting to being gay or lesbian be a tacit admission of violation of said article?

 

[The Chief]

Will they address sleeping quarters and showers?

CJCS declared no changes in either.

The devil (as always) is in the details. I heard 60 days until details would be completed/available.

The "10 Percent Rule" rules. Ten percent on either side will be the problem. My gut instinct is that we will start out ok, but down the road will might get rocky. I think most problems will be minor except in the berthing compartments aboard ship, after say 120 days at sea. There gonna be some horny toads in a target rich environment.

Anyone remember Number 2 Turrent on the Iowa, circa 1989? Yeah, I know Congress got involved and reversed the Navy's findings, the Sandia Labs were called in and muddied the waters even further. I dont' know but I been told .........

 

[Floppy_D]

Will they address sleeping quarters and showers?

To what avail? I've been serving with gay servicemembers for over nine years now, it's just now coming to light that they can be open about it. The berthings have always been cramped sausage-fests, and that won't change. PDA still isn't ok, harassment still isn't ok, and the pursuit of good order and discipline will prevent this from being anything other than case-by-case resolution. The opportunity to serve while openly gay isn't a license to turn Crew Berthing #3 into a gay bar, it just means that the guys and girls who you've been working with all along don't have to be paranoid and reclusive for fear of losing their career.

 

[insanebikerboy]

I guess it's an ignorance is bliss sort of thing. I have no problems with homos serving in the military, I actually have gay friends, but what would make it different to me is if one of the guys in my stateroom suddenly outs himself. Now, how am I gonna feel about playing PS3 in only my boxers and sandals with the knowledge that my roommate likes sausage?

The problem is easily rectified for officers, we could change staterooms. The problem lies in the 100+ man berthings where a gay guy comes out. How is that going to change the dynamic in there? I'm not saying it's going to become a gay bar but the tensions will be there similar to having men and women share the same berthing, plus some guys just being uncomfortable around gay men.

 

[Harrier Dude]

The problem is easily rectified for officers, we could change staterooms.

Easily? How? Just due to sheer numbers? You have to find somebody willing to switch with you. Good luck, but the the XO shall speak and talking time is over.

.... the tensions will be there similar to having men and women share the same berthing.....

Bingo. This is the point so often missed by those in favor of repeal. They wouldn't DREAM of forcing "Starship Trooper" rules on women, but they're happy to do it to straight men (in effect).

plus some guys just being uncomfortable around gay men.

Unless it's a direct privacy issue (berthing, showers, etc)....then they're going to just have to learn to deal with it. In fact, it appears that they're going to have learn to deal with that, too. I think the two different situations (berthing/showers and "operational life") are two separate realms, are quite different.

There is a relatively large percentage that has no issue serving with, flying with, working with, and dealing with homosexuals at work. The percentage of those that want to share a room and shower with those same people drops significantly.

Same as the men/women issue from before.

 

[eas7888]

Insane, you raise some excellent points, and they're ones that are going to have to be addressed by senior leaders. I foresee a number of homosexuality awareness classes in the near future. There really is no GOOD solution to alleviate the problems felt by those who are berthing with others of a different sexual orientation. The best solution to tell people is to grow up. If a gay guy is hitting on you, that can be considered fraternization, or sexual harassment, and ought to be dealt with as such.

Like it, or not, the ability to live with other people's differences is part of being an adult. You don't have to LIKE other people's lifestyle choices, but we all ought to respect them as individuals.

Now, in an ideal world, it would work like that. Sadly, the best thing that can be done is take these changes in stride, and meet the challenges as they arise. It may be a bumpy few years, but the Navy (and the rest of the military) ought to be able to do the incorporation smoothly. The military has (with varying degrees of success) been able to integrate genders and races, this was the next logical step.

For those with wives in the military, I'm intrigued to hear their perspective.