Gay Britons Serve in Military With Little Fuss, as Predicted

[Tock]

Gay Britons Serve in Military With Little Fuss, as Predicted
Discord Does Not Occur

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/21/wo...in&oref=slogin



By SARAH LYALL
LONDON, May 20 — The officer, a squadron leader in the Royal Air Force, felt he had no choice. So he stood up in front of his squad of 30 to 40 people.

“I said, ‘Right, I’ve got something to tell you,’ ” he said. “ ‘I believe that for us to be able to work closely together and have faith in each other, we have to be honest and open and frank. And it has to be a two-way process, and it starts with me baring my soul. You may have heard some rumors, and yes, I have a long-term partner who is a he, not a she.’ ”

Far from causing problems, he said, he found that coming out to his troops actually increased the unit’s strength and cohesion. He had felt uneasy keeping the secret “that their boss was a poof,” as he put it, from people he worked with so closely.

Since the British military began allowing homosexuals to serve in the armed forces in 2000, none of its fears — about harassment, discord, blackmail, bullying or an erosion of unit cohesion or military effectiveness — have come to pass, according to the Ministry of Defense, current and former members of the services and academics specializing in the military. The biggest news about the policy, they say, is that there is no news. It has for the most part become a nonissue.

The Ministry of Defense does not compile figures on how many gay men and lesbians are openly serving, and it says that the number of people who have come out publicly in the past seven years is still relatively low. But it is clearly proud of how smoothly homosexuals have been integrated and is trying to make life easier for them.

“What we’re hoping to do is to, over a period of time, reinforce the message that people who are gay, lesbian and the like are welcomed in the armed forces and we don’t discriminate against them in any way,” a Defense Ministry official said in an interview, speaking on condition of anonymity in accordance with the ministry’s practice.

Nonetheless, the issue is extremely delicate now. The military does not want to be seen bragging about the success of its policy when the issue can still cause so much anguished debate in the United States. This is particularly true in light of tensions between the allies after a British coroner ruled in March that a British soldier who died four years ago was unlawfully killed by an American pilot.

For this article, the Defense Ministry refused to give permission for any member of the forces to be interviewed, either on or off the record. Those who spoke did so before the ministry made its position clear.

“We’re not looking to have quotes taken out of context in a way to imply that we’re trying to influence the debate in the United States,” the British official said. “There are some sensitivities over the timing of this. We have had communications from our counterparts in the United States, and they have asked us questions about how we’ve handled it and how it’s gone on the ground. There does seem to be some debate going on over how long the current policy will be sustainable.”

The debate in the United States was rekindled in March when Gen. Peter Pace, who as chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff is the country’s top-ranking military official, told The Chicago Tribune that he believed that homosexuality was immoral.

In January, Gen. John M. Shalikashvili, who until his retirement in 1997 held the same post in the Clinton years, when the Pentagon adopted its “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy, said in an Op-Ed article in The New York Times that he now believed that the military was ready to accept gay men and lesbians. A military already stretched thin, he said, “must welcome the service of any American who is willing and able to do the job.”

At least 24 countries — many of them allies of the United States, and some of them members of the coalition forces fighting alongside Americans — now allow gay soldiers to serve openly in their armed forces.

It is hard to avoid comparing the British and American systems, gay soldiers in the British forces say.

One major, an openly gay liaison officer in the British Territorial Army, told of an exchange he had in the southern Iraq city of Basra with an American staff sergeant, far from home and eager to confide.

“He privately let me know he was gay,” the major said in an interview. “Not in a romantic way, but in a matter-of-fact way. He found it difficult, because he clearly had a whole part of his private life that he had to keep separate and distinct and couldn’t discuss with people. He was in his mid-30s, with no girlfriend and no wife, and he had to use all these white lies.”

Some Britons said they could not understand why the United States had not changed its policy.

“I find it strange, coming from the land of the free and freedom of speech and democracy, given the changes in the world attitude,” said the gay squadron leader, who recently returned from Afghanistan. “It’s just not the issue it used to be.”

Until its policy changed, the British military had deep misgivings about allowing homosexuals to serve openly in its armed forces. But it had no choice. It was forced to by a European court, which ruled that its policy of excluding homosexuals violated the European Convention on Human Rights.

“There was a lot of apprehension among some senior personnel that there would be an increase in things like bullying and harassment based on sexual orientation, and some of them were almost predicting that the world was going to come to an end,” the Defense Ministry official said.

Similar concerns were raised when, bowing to national antidiscrimination laws, the military began allowing gay personnel who had registered for civil partnerships to live in military housing with their same-sex partners. “But all the problems the services thought were going to come to pass really haven’t materialized,” the official said.

To the extent it becomes an issue, it is usually within the context of the relentlessly rough give-and-take that characterizes military life, particularly at the lower ranks, said Nathaniel Frank, a researcher at the Michael D. Palm Center at the University of California, Santa Barbara, who has studied the British experience.

“The military is a proving ground, and the first thing people do is find your weakness and exploit it,” Mr. Frank said in an e-mail interview. “If you’re gay, that’s your weakness, and guys will latch on to that. But frequently this is no more significant a weakness than any other based on your accent, body type, race, religion, etc.”

The British military actively recruits gay men and lesbians and punishes any instance of intolerance or bullying. The Royal Navy advertises for recruits in gay magazines and has allowed gay sailors to hold civil partnership ceremonies on board ships and, last summer, to march in full naval uniform at a gay pride rally in London. (British Army and Royal Air Force personnel could march but had to wear civilian clothes.)

Speaking at a conference sponsored by the gay advocacy group Stonewall last year, Vice Adm. Adrian Johns, the second sea lord, said that homosexuals had always served in the military but in the past had had to do it secretly.

“That’s an unhealthy way to be, to try and keep a secret life in the armed services,” said Admiral Johns, who as the Royal Navy’s principal personnel officer is responsible for about 39,000 sailors. His speech was titled “Reaping the Rewards of a Gay-Friendly Workplace.”

“Those individuals need nurturing, so that they give of their best and are, in turn, rewarded for their effort,” he said of the Royal Navy’s gay men and lesbians. “Nurture includes the freedom to be themselves. Our mission is to break down barriers of discrimination, prejudice, fear and misunderstanding.”

Once the news is out there, the gay Royal Air Force squadron leader said, the issue gets subsumed by the job at hand and by the relentless immediacy of war.

At one point, his squad was working with a British Army unit. “I wouldn’t go into a briefing room and face them and say, ‘By the way, I’m gay,’ ” he said of his British Army counterparts. “Frankly, I don’t think they were worried, because we were all focused on doing a very, very hard job.”

He recalled something his commander had said, when advising him to come out to his squad:

“The boss said, ‘I think you will be surprised that in this day and age it will be a complete anticlimax, because as far as I’m concerned, homosexuals in the military are yesterday’s news.’ ”

[Carlos_E]

Some Britons said they could not understand why the United States had not changed its policy.

Because Americans are slow and resistant to change.

[Logan13]

Because Americans are slow and resistant to change.

Perhaps because US gays are trying to shove it on the rest of the population. Americans do not liked to be forced into such an indoctrination. So, are you guys going to sign up for the British navy then or what?

[kfrost06]

Perhaps because US gays are trying to shove it on the rest of the population. Americans do not liked to be forced into such an indoctrination. So, are you guys going to sign up for the British navy then or what?

I say go for it, your future husband might be there.

[Carlos_E]

I say go for it, your future husband might be there.

Been there done that. He's a sergeant in the US Army.

[Swifto]

The USA Army doesnt allow gay people in it?

[Carlos_E]

Perhaps because US gays are trying to shove it on the rest of the population. Americans do not liked to be forced into such an indoctrination. So, are you guys going to sign up for the British navy then or what?

Oh please. Americans are slow on any issue. We fear change.

[Swifto]

Ok. My questions answered. I had no idea.

[Carlos_E]

Ok. My questions answered. I had no idea.

The policy is "don't ask, don't tell." As in when you're in front of a recruiter he can't ask you if you're gay. But if you tell him, they will not allow you in. The policy is bullshit. They do ask and they do tell. If someone in the military outs you they will approach you and ask if it is true. If you tell the truth. They throw you out.

From dating Lee, I've met a lot of straight guys in his unit and they could care less that he was gay. They said when they are getting shot at and someone is saving their life pulling them out of the line of fire the last thing on their mind is whether or not the person is gay.

[slob]

yeh im pretty sure i wouldnt care if the guy whos got my back is gay or straight. Someone who is gay can pull the trigger just as good as someone who isn't.
no biggie

[Carlos_E]

yeh im pretty sure i wouldnt care if the guy whos got my back is gay or straight. Someone who is gay can pull the trigger just as good as someone who isn't.
no biggie

Are you military?

[Logan13]

The policy is "don't ask, don't tell." As in when you're in front of a recruiter he can't ask you if you're gay. But if you tell him, they will not allow you in. The policy is bullshit. They do ask and they do tell. If someone in the military outs you they will approach you and ask if it is true. If you tell the truth. They throw you out.

From dating Lee, I've met a lot of straight guys in his unit and they could care less that he was gay. They said when they are getting shot at and someone is saving their life pulling them out of the line of fire the last thing on their mind is whether or not the person is gay.

Yes, the Republicans were crazy for putting that policy in place..........
Again, thank a Democrat for categorizing yet another group with US law.

[Logan13]

From dating Lee, I've met a lot of straight guys in his unit and they could care less that he was gay. They said when they are getting shot at and someone is saving their life pulling them out of the line of fire the last thing on their mind is whether or not the person is gay.

Do you think that they meant what they said, it sounds cliche? I've seen whites nice and accomodating to a black person to their face, but when they are gone they make jokes about them. Many people are two-faced candy asses. Hopefully those in his unit are not........

[Carlos_E]

Yes, the Republicans were crazy for putting that policy in place..........
Again, thank a Democrat for categorizing yet another group with US law.

I did not blame Republicans. I blame the pussy ass president who approved don't ask don't tell as quick fix.

[Carlos_E]

Do you think that they meant what they said, it sounds cliche? I've seen whites nice and accomodating to a black person to their face, but when they are gone they make jokes about them. Many people are two-faced candy asses. Hopefully those in his unit are not........

Nope. They are real. Friends he's had since he started serving. He's the god parent for some of thier kids. I wouldn't call that two faced.

[MuscleScience]

The greeks allowed gay men in their army. Infact they had an all gay unit that was one of the best and most feared fighting units in all of history (not because they were gay). Who cares anymore I dont worry about a gay guy hitting on me. There are a lot worse things in the world we should be worrying about.

[Carlos_E]

The greeks allowed gay men in their army. Infact they had an all gay unit that was one of the best and most feared fighting units in all of history (not because they were gay). Who cares anymore I dont worry about a gay guy hitting on me. There are a lot worse things in the world we should be worrying about.

Like fat women hitting on you?

[MuscleScience]

Like fat women hitting on you?

Exactly.

[BgMc31]

Yes, the Republicans were crazy for putting that policy in place..........
Again, thank a Democrat for categorizing yet another group with US law.

Have to call you out on this one Logan. In another thread, you claimed that all of Clinton's accomplishments were because of a Republican controlled congress and now you saying that this one is Clinton's fault... c'mon!!!

Anyway, back to the topic, England has always been the front runner on change of social policy. They were the first to end and condemn slavery, first to have a female head of state (and not the queen), now the issue of gays in the military. Eventually the US and other countries will evolve to the point and realize that social change doesn't always mean the end of civilization as we know it.

[Lexed]

dont ask dont tell

[Tock]

The USA Army doesnt allow gay people in it?

No.

The US military is desperate for people who speak Arabic, and they've already kicked out 66 Arabic-speaking soldiers for no other reason than that they're gay.

Makes no sense whatsoever. But then, neither does the Bush administration . . .

[Tock]

Perhaps because US gays are trying to shove it on the rest of the population.

Shove what? A chance to serve our country by getting shot at or blown up in Iraq?

Americans do not liked to be forced into such an indoctrination.

Forced? As if gays aren't being forced into a subserviant social role by bigoted military hetrosexuals?
F.T.S . . .

So, are you guys going to sign up for the British navy then or what?

Unlike some war-supporters I know, I've already served my time in the military.
When are you gonna sign up and put your a-- on the line, my eternally civilian, military-dodging friend?

[spywizard]

only warning.. political threads are not allowed on this board...

i think?? hm..

yea, i'm right about that..

[Carlos_E]

I've already served my time in the military.
When are you gonna sign up and put your a-- on the line, my eternally civilian, military-dodging friend?

I've served my time in the military. Just in a different way.

[Tock]

I did not blame Republicans. I blame the pussy ass president who approved don't ask don't tell as quick fix.

Some of that policy's history --
At the time, when he had first taken office back in 1993, Clinton had no idea that changing that policy would be such a big deal, he thought it would be a simple "little" policy change to start his administration off. As soon as he brought up the topic, the Republicans went nuts, and promised a Constitutional amendment to make life more miserable for gays if he went through with his executive order.

He had two gay congressmen from Massachusetts advising him about what to do. One said, "Go ahead, pass your executive order, and let the Republicans do their worst." The other (Barney Frank) said, "We've got a mess here, let's just take the best we can get, and go with it for now, and don't make things worse for the gays in the military now."

There was a lot of debate in the gay community on both sides, but Clinton took the "Don't ask don't tell" option. It's not what my choice would have been, it had at least 51% of someone's vote . . .

[brewerpi]

I did not blame Republicans. I blame the pussy ass president who approved don't ask don't tell as quick fix.

This is one issue you can't blame on Republicans, the Democrats controlled the House and Senate and Clinton was President when this became law.
I'm not saying the Republicans would have allowed gays in the military but it was your "friend" Bill Clinton who signed it in to law.

[RA]

So you would be in favor of coed showers?

The policy is "don't ask, don't tell." As in when you're in front of a recruiter he can't ask you if you're gay. But if you tell him, they will not allow you in. The policy is bullshit. They do ask and they do tell. If someone in the military outs you they will approach you and ask if it is true. If you tell the truth. They throw you out.

From dating Lee, I've met a lot of straight guys in his unit and they could care less that he was gay. They said when they are getting shot at and someone is saving their life pulling them out of the line of fire the last thing on their mind is whether or not the person is gay.

[Carlos_E]

So you would be in favor of coed showers?

No. And that is a silly question.

You are in bathrooms, locker rooms and showers with gay men every day right now.

[RA]

No. And that is a silly question.

You are in bathrooms, locker rooms and showers with gay men every day right now.

Its not a silly question. Whats the difference? I get hit on by gay men around town all the time and take it as a compliment...doesnt mean Id like to take showers with em. Call me old fashioned.

[Carlos_E]

doesnt mean Id like to take showers with em. Call me old fashioned.

You take showers with gay men right now. Don't tell me you're so naive to believe every guy at your gym or in your shower is straight. I believe the number is 1 out of 7 or 1 out of 10. Next time you're at the gym taking a shower do the math.

[RA]

You take showers with gay men right now. Don't tell me you're so naive to believe every guy at your gym or in your shower is straight. I believe the number is 1 out of 7 or 1 out of 10. Next time you're at the gym taking a shower do the math.

No, your probably right about the numbers. Personally I have all my workout equipment at home so its not an issue.

[Logan13]

I blame the pussy ass president who approved don't ask don't tell as quick fix.

Truely a political move that created as many problems as it solved.

[Logan13]

Have to call you out on this one Logan. In another thread, you claimed that all of Clinton's accomplishments were because of a Republican controlled congress and now you saying that this one is Clinton's fault... c'mon!!!

Anyway, back to the topic, England has always been the front runner on change of social policy. They were the first to end and condemn slavery, first to have a female head of state (and not the queen), now the issue of gays in the military. Eventually the US and other countries will evolve to the point and realize that social change doesn't always mean the end of civilization as we know it.

You need to check your facts before calling me out:
1994: Republicans gained control of Congress
1993: Don't ask/Don't tell policy signed into law.
wikpedia.com
Don't ask/Don't tell policy
It was introduced as a compromise measure in 1993 by President Bill Clinton who, while campaigning for the Presidency, had promised to allow all citizens regardless of sexual orientation to serve openly in the military, a ***arture from the then complete ban on those who are not heterosexual.

Come on Bg..............

[Logan13]

Shove what? A chance to serve our country by getting shot at or blown up in Iraq?

Forced? As if gays aren't being forced into a subserviant social role by bigoted military hetrosexuals?
F.T.S . . .

Unlike some war-supporters I know, I've already served my time in the military.
When are you gonna sign up and put your a-- on the line, my eternally civilian, military-dodging friend?

I have a hard time believing that you were honorably discharged..........