Don’t Ask Don’t Tell

What is this “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy?

• An official United States policy on service by gays and lesbians in the military instituted by the Clinton Administration in February 28, 1994.
• The policy prohibited military personnel from discriminating against or harassing closeted homosexual or bisexual service members or applicants, while barring openly gay, lesbian, or bisexual persons from military service. 
• The act prohibited any homosexual or bisexual person from disclosing his or her sexual orientation or from speaking about any homosexual relationships, including marriages or other familial attributes, while serving in the United States armed forces.
• The act specified that service members who disclose that they are homosexual or engage in homosexual conduct should be separated (discharged) except when a service member’s conduct was “for the purpose of avoiding or terminating military service” or when it “would not be in the best interest of the armed forces”. (10 U.S. Code § 654)

Before DADT

• The Articles of War is a legal ban in the military on sodomy, and through sodomy, on gay or lesbian sexual orentation (Burrelli, 1994, p. 17).
• “Mobilization Regulations” stated, “Persons who habitually or occasionally engage in homosexual or other perverse sexual practices are unsuitable for military service and will be excluded” Menninger, 1948, p. 228)
• After WWII, The Department of Defense revised the military policy regarding homosexual behavior:
  • Homosexual personnel, irrespective of sex, should not be permitted to serve in any branch of the Armed Services in any capacity, and prompt separation of known homosexuals from the Armed Service is mandatory. (RAND, 1993, p. 6)
• 1951: Article 125 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) included the acts of sodomy (oral and anal sex), an act where personnel can be court marshaled (10 U.S.C. 925).

 Adressing the Problem of homosexuality in the military:

• 1981: Deputy Secretary of Defense W. Graham Claytor, Jr., created a new policy that made “discharge(s) mandatory for admitted homosexuals and establishes very limited grounds for retention” (Claytor, 1981).
  • This clarified and made standard of policies tahtwould help the DoD fend of court challenges
  • It provided an explination that “homosexuality is imcompatible with military service” (DoD,1982).
• Claytor also gave a standard basis being discharged from the military on grounds of sexual orientation.
  1. Statement from another member that he/she is gay
  2. engagement in or attempted engagement in same sexual acts
  3. marriage or attempted marriage to a person of the same sex

The Beginning of DADT

• Harvard University, October 1991: Presidential Candidate William (Bill) Clinton claims that if he is elected president, he would sign an executive to end discrimination on sexual orientation in the military.
• Several disagreed with this, and General Colin Powell said that lifting the homosexual ban would be “prejudicial to good order and discipline” (Powell, 1995).
• Clinton became president January 1993.
• Administration came to an agreement with the Joint Chiefs and Senate Leadership. Clinton agreed to postpone the regarding the new policy to end sexual orientation in the military. In exchange Congress agreed to withdraw efforts to pass legislation immediately concerning the issue (Stephanopolous, 1999).
• January 1993: President Bill Clinton directed Secretary of Defense Aspin to draft by July 15 an executive order “ending discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation in determining who may serve in the Armed Forces of the United States” (The White House, 1993)

Clinton’s Vision

• Separate sexual orientation from conduct and create a zone of privacy for gay service embers, such that known gay men and lesbians could serve in the military as long as their behavior was otherwise consistent with high standards of conduct (Clinton).
• “I want to make it very clear that this is a very narrow issue. It is whether a person, in the absence of any other disqualifying conduct, can simply say that he or she is homosexual and stay in the service” (Clinton, 1993).
• Clinton did not have congress’s full support of ending homosexual discrimination in the military, so instead administration adopted an alternative policy. This became the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” policy. What DADT means is that service members could not be questioned about their sexual orientation, and gay and lesbian individuals would be required to keep that information of sexual orientation private. But once a member’s sexual orientation became known that he/she is homosexual, that would become ground for investigation and dismissal.

“Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”

• The new policy set more restrictive standards for initiating investigations of alleged same sex conduct.
• Investigations could only operate on the basis of “credible information” and “Commanders and investigating agencies will not initiate inquiries or investigations solely to determine a member’s sexual orientation” (Aspin, 1993).

• Administration had created distinctions between sexual orientation and conduct for soldiers, but Congress rejected these distinctions.
• The new law stipulated that known homosexuals would pose an “unacceptable risk” to military effectiveness and that the exposure of gay or lesbian sexual orientation, irrespective of other same-sex conduct, was enough to warrant an investigation and separation.
• The DADT law contrasted sharply with the original aims of President Clinton.
• The law was implemented in December 1993 and February 1994.
• The Clinton administration’s vision, which characterized sexual orientation as a “personal and private matter” and distinguished between sexual orientation and the “propensity to engage” in same-sex sexual acts, remained.
  • But at the same time, it allowed for interpretive discretion, defining “statements” as “language or behavior” and creating standards that varied widely and could constitute for grounds of investigation and discharge.

The Final Product

• The DADT law had defined the precise relationship between sexual orientation, statements, conduct, and propensity or intent.
• The only new difference was while service members were not asked about their sexual orientation, if a person’s sexual orientation came known to fellow soldiers and commanders, it would still be grounds for investigation and discharge.

• President Clinton originally aimed to allow gay men and lesbians to serve. But this plan changed when it proved to be politically untenable, so he sought to provide more protection for gay service members by establishing policies that separated sexual orientation from conduct and limited the conditions under which commanders could initiate investigations.

Where Matters Stand Now

• There have been notable trends in discharges for sexual orientation over the last 30 years.
• From early 1980’s to 1994, overall numbers have steadily declined.
• Following DADT, discharges began to rise.
  • Why rise? witch hunts, friendly fire of homosexuals from homo-phobics, other members looking to get out of the service.
• But since 2002, they have fallen sharply.
• Since 2004 opponents of DADT have focused to repeal the law in Congress.

Repeal of DADT

• In 2010 President Barack Obama announced he would work with Congress to repeal DADT.
• February 2010, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates announced he would appoint a group with in DoD to review the issues associated with the repeal.
• As of September 20, 2011 “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy was no longer a policy.
  • Gays and lesbians previously discharged for homosexuality were now allowed to re-enlist
  • Still do not have equal access to military benefits

---

 

Bibliography

• “Department of Defense Directive 1304.26”. Retrieved December 5, 2014.
• “Gays in the Military”. Retrieved December 5, 2014.
• 10 U.S.C. § 654(b)
• 10 U.S.C. § 654(e)

Contributed by Breanne Kelly

 

 

Bring Awareness to GBV

http://www.amnestyusa.org/our-work/issues/women-s-rights/violence-against-women/16-days

The 16 Days of Activism Against Gender Violence is an international campaign that starts on 25 November, International Day for the Elimination of Violence against Women and ends on 10 December, Human Rights Day.

Go to Facebook and find “The Official 16 days of Activism Against Gender Based Violence Campaign” or click the link above and read the blogs of the intersections of gender based violence and militarism worldwide.

-Wade B

Women: Victims of Military Violence

http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/512380

This article presents incredible amounts of helpful information.

In addition to this article I had the opportunity to interview a male family member about his time in the Air Force. He was stationed in South Korea in the late 1980s. Just as in the article suggested, he reaffirmed the information about the prostitution and human trafficking that was taking place in this time.

“Although the trafficking was not being done by the military, it was being done for us.”

One of his duties as a patrol officer was to close down the bars off the base and bring back all of the military members. They would start on the far end of the street and work their way down thru every bar and nearly every bar had some sort of prostitution. Many women were dancing naked above the bars and in cages.

“There was nothing that I as a military member, could do about it. It wasn’t done by our military and it was off base.”

Just as the article done by Donohoe suggests, the women were trafficked in from the Philippines and the Soviet Union.

-Wade B

Insight From A Past Military Women

I have a relative who mas in the Army for several years and was even stationed over seas in Korea. She also married a military man as well who just finished his duty this past year. I emailed her about this project and asked her about gender based violence in the military and this is what she had to say.

“Hmm, this will take some thought so I may come back to this, but off the top of my head I don’t recall any personal stories. I had a great family like unit. However, it does happen. I actually took a class sponsored by the Navy to become a Sexual Assault Advocate. A majority of the time it was women being sexually assaulted, but it did happen to men too. Usually it was a case of a higher ranking female to a lower ranking male.

Sexual assault (only one kind of gender based violence grant you) is something that happens quite often and is not reported a majority of the time in fear of repercussions on the victim.

I’m not exactly sure what you’re project covers or entails, but there are cases of male soldiers who beat their wives as well….sometimes it’s PTSD related, others it’s not.

On the flip side there are very few circumstances of wives doing the same to their husbands.”

As she mentioned it can happen to men as well as women. When women do it it is usually a higher ranking female to a lower ranking male. She also mentioned that the military actually has classes to educate people about sexual assault and violence as well. I feel this is a good step toward stopping gender based violence in the military. The last thing she mentions occurs after their term of service. Soldiers that struggle from PTSD sometimes beat their spouses. This is quite interesting because when doing this project I thought it all happened with in the military, but it can happen back home due to PTSD. The military is doing things to stop it while in service, but we need find away to stop the violence back home as well.

– Garrett M.