"Don't Ask, Don't Tell" Forces Service Members to Compromise Their Integrity
By Steve Maddox JGSM '10, U.S. Marine Corps Veteran
Issue date: 3/8/10 Section: Perspectives
Last month, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Mike Mullen, testified before the Senate Armed Forces Committee that the time had come to review the possibility of repealing the military's "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" (DADT) policy. Admiral Mullen stated, "No matter how I look at the issue, I cannot escape being troubled by the fact that we have in place a policy which forces young men and women to lie about who they are in order to defend their fellow citizens." Dedicating his life to an organization where honor and integrity are more than passing corporate buzzwords, Admiral Mullen has struck to the core of the matter. We are asking young men and women to do the unthinkable and not letting a small minority of them be authentic about who they are while serving their nation. It is time to repeal the military's Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy.
Just how many people are we talking about? In 2008, there were just short of 120 million Americans fit for military service (59.4 million men, 59.2 million women aged 18-49) down from a total of 143 million Americans available for service. The 23 million person difference are those disqualified for a variety of physical and mental disabilities for which the military cannot accept them for service. Of the 120 million Americans fit for military service in 2008, there were 1,475,900 serving on Active duty with a reserve component of 1,458,500. That makes 2,934,400 service members available for service at any given time, or 2.4% of the available fit for service population. With an American population over 300 million, that's less than 1% of the U.S. population serving in our military at any given time. On Election Day, 2008, four percent of the electorate self-identified themselves as gay, lesbian, or bi-sexual. Given this percentage, it could be argued that the total number of homosexuals currently serving in the military is around 117,000 (a population the size of Vallejo, California). It seems to me, from experience, that saying that the military would mirror society in this regard is an over estimation. It seems plausible that many homosexuals would self-select out of the service selection process, making this number somewhat smaller, but by how much, I couldn't say. 117,000 would appear to be a good estimate of the high side.
With regard to the above number, I would also assert that we as a country are comfortable with gay women serving. In no other service did I find this truer than in my own Marine Corps. I never once, in 10 years, heard someone question a female Marine's capabilities because of her perceived sexual orientation. In fact, "hard WM's" (code for lesbian, I found) were a commodity in short supply on the female search teams around Iraq when I was there for "The Surge" in 2006/2007. Rather, I think the uneasiness in the conversation regarding the repealing of DADT is gay men. Since male only units still exist in the infantry, I feel that the concern in repealing DADT is directed toward these units.
A Marine infantry unit is the most testosterone driven environment I can imagine. It's an NFL football team with the actual ability to kill its opponent.. It's every overly cocky guy you've ever encountered in a bar, but with a gun. A place where second place isn't just the first loser, but the first ridiculed. It's unforgiving. The toughest question you'd receive in a Nate Peck class would be a softball in this environment. It was also the most egalitarian place that I served. Performance mattered; things like race, social class, bank accounts, the kind of car you drive were all viewed (correctly in my mind) as things that don't speak to the type of person that you are. The only thing that mattered was the effort that you expended, the capability that you proved, and the content of your character. All of the units I served in shared the same dichotomy, both insular and accepting. I have faith in the capacity and maturity of today's young people, especially those willing to make the sacrifice to serve in our nation's defense. It's why I feel that openly gay service members would be able to serve in any unit and that the policy of DADT is a relic, necessary for a different time and era in America.
In 1948, President Truman signed Executive Order No. 9981 which provided for "equality of treatment and opportunity in the armed forces without regard to race, color, religion, or national origin." It was well ahead of the social norms of the day where segregation of services existed all over the country. Sadly, today, the military is behind the social norm of the day. Our military is finding it more difficult with each passing year to attract people to service. The Army lowered its entrance requirements in 2005 to allow former non-violent felons to serve. However, we somehow find it morally questionable to let men and women openly serve their country regardless of their conduct with other consenting adults. There is a gap in the logic of letting the super-minority defend the majority while at the same time demanding that they hide their social relationships. It's inconsistent with the core values that were instilled in me from day one of boot camp: Marines never lie, cheat, or steal. We always display honor, courage, and commitment. Its time that we let gay servicemen and women live the lives we purport to demand from them.
Steve Maddox served 10 years in the United States Marine Corps in the Intelligence, Infantry, and Communications fields. He spent his summer with Goldman Sachs and has accepted a full-time position with Deloitte Consulting's Stratey & Operations practice out of their Detroit office.
Just how many people are we talking about? In 2008, there were just short of 120 million Americans fit for military service (59.4 million men, 59.2 million women aged 18-49) down from a total of 143 million Americans available for service. The 23 million person difference are those disqualified for a variety of physical and mental disabilities for which the military cannot accept them for service. Of the 120 million Americans fit for military service in 2008, there were 1,475,900 serving on Active duty with a reserve component of 1,458,500. That makes 2,934,400 service members available for service at any given time, or 2.4% of the available fit for service population. With an American population over 300 million, that's less than 1% of the U.S. population serving in our military at any given time. On Election Day, 2008, four percent of the electorate self-identified themselves as gay, lesbian, or bi-sexual. Given this percentage, it could be argued that the total number of homosexuals currently serving in the military is around 117,000 (a population the size of Vallejo, California). It seems to me, from experience, that saying that the military would mirror society in this regard is an over estimation. It seems plausible that many homosexuals would self-select out of the service selection process, making this number somewhat smaller, but by how much, I couldn't say. 117,000 would appear to be a good estimate of the high side.
With regard to the above number, I would also assert that we as a country are comfortable with gay women serving. In no other service did I find this truer than in my own Marine Corps. I never once, in 10 years, heard someone question a female Marine's capabilities because of her perceived sexual orientation. In fact, "hard WM's" (code for lesbian, I found) were a commodity in short supply on the female search teams around Iraq when I was there for "The Surge" in 2006/2007. Rather, I think the uneasiness in the conversation regarding the repealing of DADT is gay men. Since male only units still exist in the infantry, I feel that the concern in repealing DADT is directed toward these units.
A Marine infantry unit is the most testosterone driven environment I can imagine. It's an NFL football team with the actual ability to kill its opponent.. It's every overly cocky guy you've ever encountered in a bar, but with a gun. A place where second place isn't just the first loser, but the first ridiculed. It's unforgiving. The toughest question you'd receive in a Nate Peck class would be a softball in this environment. It was also the most egalitarian place that I served. Performance mattered; things like race, social class, bank accounts, the kind of car you drive were all viewed (correctly in my mind) as things that don't speak to the type of person that you are. The only thing that mattered was the effort that you expended, the capability that you proved, and the content of your character. All of the units I served in shared the same dichotomy, both insular and accepting. I have faith in the capacity and maturity of today's young people, especially those willing to make the sacrifice to serve in our nation's defense. It's why I feel that openly gay service members would be able to serve in any unit and that the policy of DADT is a relic, necessary for a different time and era in America.
In 1948, President Truman signed Executive Order No. 9981 which provided for "equality of treatment and opportunity in the armed forces without regard to race, color, religion, or national origin." It was well ahead of the social norms of the day where segregation of services existed all over the country. Sadly, today, the military is behind the social norm of the day. Our military is finding it more difficult with each passing year to attract people to service. The Army lowered its entrance requirements in 2005 to allow former non-violent felons to serve. However, we somehow find it morally questionable to let men and women openly serve their country regardless of their conduct with other consenting adults. There is a gap in the logic of letting the super-minority defend the majority while at the same time demanding that they hide their social relationships. It's inconsistent with the core values that were instilled in me from day one of boot camp: Marines never lie, cheat, or steal. We always display honor, courage, and commitment. Its time that we let gay servicemen and women live the lives we purport to demand from them.
Steve Maddox served 10 years in the United States Marine Corps in the Intelligence, Infantry, and Communications fields. He spent his summer with Goldman Sachs and has accepted a full-time position with Deloitte Consulting's Stratey & Operations practice out of their Detroit office.
Be the first to comment on this story