J. Neil Schulman
@ Agorist.com
Homophobia Defeats Gays in the Military
From The Village People music video
“In The Navy”
filmed aboard the USS Reasoner
It’s not all that well-remembered by the general public, but in 1979 the Department of the Navy liked The Village People’s song “In the Navy” so much that it gave the Village People use of the USS Reasoner, several aircraft, and the crew of the ship for use in the making of the music video, and intended using the song in the Navy’s TV/radio recruiting campaign — until protests killed that idea.
Today the acceptance of gays into the mainstream of American life suffered another defeat as the United States Senate voted down an amendment to an appropriations bill that would have allowed gays to serve openly in the United States military. All Republicans and two Democrats voted against allowing gays to serve. It’s not good news for Republicans when they claim in their talking points not to be bigots.
It’s even worse for Democrats who lose elections when they can’t energize their base to walk precincts for them.
I’m not one to throw around the term “homophobia” a lot — if for no other reason than the construction of the word suggests to me as much a fear-and-loathing of homo sapiens — a synonym for misanthropy — as it does fear and loathing of homosexuals. But, honestly, that’s just the nit-picking pedantry in me; we do need a word which means that.
Clearly homophobia is real. Gay-bashing — and even murder cases like Matthew Shepard’s — demonstrate the historical utility of gays remaining in the closet. Even today the Montana Republican platform supports a state law making homosexual acts illegal even though the Montana Supreme Court struck down the law as unconstitutional thirteen years ago.
The usual objection to gays serving openly in the military is the premise that it will be disruptive to military life and military discipline. This is an actual fear held by many heterosexual men that in close quarters homosexual men will make sexual advances to them — or worse, rape them.
This is not an entirely irrational fear. Homosexual men are the same species as heterosexual men: homo sapiens. A search of gay porno will find plenty of story lines where a gay is attracted to a supposedly straight friend and seduces him or her. Same-sex rape is common in other confined populations, such as prisons; and certainly — as the Roman Catholic Church tried to cover up for decades — even priests who had taken vows of chastity were not immune from acting out sexual desires on altar boys. The United States Senate, itself, has had scandals involving the seduction of Senate pages by United States Senators … and not all of them were heterosexual.
If we’re honest about it, a lot of men will stick their dicks into anything with a hole, and every male human being has at least two servicable holes.
Of course the same objections to allowing gays to serve openly were previously used to object to allowing women to serve in the military. But during World War II 150,000 WACS served in the uniform of the United States Army — General Douglas MacArthur praised these women as “my best soldiers” — and other women served the United States Navy in the WAVES and the Coast Guard SPARS.
Since 1994 women have successfully served in forward combat areas, and most recently are now being assigned to submarine service.
So is the fear straights have that a gay will break military discipline so disruptive that the service needs to be deprived of their talents?
I don’t think so. If the military can’t enforce something as basic as barracks discipline, are they even combat ready in the first place? If straight soldiers are so afraid of having a pass made at them, are they brave enough to face the enemy?
It’s time for straight men to man up. Fear of gays is for sissies.
Note: Please read the enlightening comment below (#1) by Iraq-war combat veteran, Brian Singer.
This article is Copyright © 2010 The J. Neil Schulman Living Trust. All rights reserved.
Winner of the Special Jury Prize for Libertarian Ideals from the 2011 Anthem Film Festival! My comic thriller Lady Magdalene’s — a movie I wrote, produced, directed, and acted in it — is now available free on the web linked from the official movie website. If you like the way I think, I think you’ll like this movie. Check it out!
September 21, 2010 - 6:23 pm
Here’s the disconnect: we’re taking about the military in this general sense that implies we are all of one mind, while the the opposite is true. The military sends Generals and Colonels every day to lobby Congress and the White House. Who are these guys? Well, they’re guys who work at the Pentagon, and have made a caterer out of doing so. Get on the DC Metro Blue Line, and take a ride through Pentagon Station, and count how many you see with a patch on their left shoulder, but none on their right ( the one one the right designating combat experience). These are the guys who make policy, who lobby.
Here’s the truth from my eyes in the ground: I spent the first five years of my Army career in combat arms. All men. Extremely HOOAH stuff, to say the least. I’m an analyst now, a desk jockey, a pogue. I have never met one single soldier who really cares what a guy’s sexual orientation is ( and believe me, no one gives a rat’s ass about lesbians, other than thinking that’s “hot”). I’ve served with homosexuals, and as open as society is today, it’s universally recognized that the only reason to keep it a secret is this legal fiction. Everyone knows who is gay, and who is not, and I challenge anyone who thinks that this is an issue of “good order and discipline” or “morale” to try to attack a gay soldier when he’s hanging out with his squad. I promise you, they’ll kick the crap out of you. I know I would. I am charged with the welfare of my soldiers. Fuck with one of my guys, gay, straight, Catholic, red haired, bad skin, fat, likes Oprah… I don’t give a shit, I will fuck you up, and I have not met a single soldier or non-commissioned officer in almost seven years who feels any other way.
September 23, 2010 - 9:20 am
Mr. Singer has just made an excellent case for categorically forbidding veterans from service in domestic police forces (unless of course they are trained as MPs).
This very group cohesiveness that is vital for combat is absolutely fatal at home, and fosters an “us-against-them,” “f**k-with-one-of-mine-and-I-will-f**k-you-up” mentality that is a formula for police abuse.
Of course any statesman who would propose such a prohibition would be in for an immediate political crucifixion. And predictably, the very opposite is under Congressional consideration in various “Troops to COPS” proposals.
Sorry, Neil, if this is a bit off-topic, but the point needs to be made.
September 25, 2010 - 7:33 pm
“Fuck with one of my guys, gay, straight, Catholic, red haired, bad skin, fat, likes Oprah… I don’t give a shit, I will fuck you up” is the creed of the Three Musketeers — “All for one and one for all” — put into modern language.
It’s part of human nature, and applies to families — fuck with my younger brother and I’ll fuck you up” — or gangs, or tribes, religions, etc.
I’m an individualist, but if someone fucks with my daughter, I will fuck them up.
As you say, it’s the basis for all “us against them.”
Good luck eliminating that from human nature.
But Brian’s point is revealing: that straight men can accept gay men as “us” and defend them as members of the tribe.
That’s kind of a revolution.
October 28, 2010 - 3:30 pm
The above article does not address the real concerns about gays in the military, but instead attacks an easy straw man, then goes on to make an argument that actually undermines its own position.
The objection isn’t that men could get hit on and raped. That’s a common-guy worry, but the military management is far more worried about the dynamics of interpersonal relationships, which can cause distraction in combat situations, and dangerous behavior in an environment of deadly weapons and training.
You mention women in the military, and that the same objections were raised about them…but you fail to point out that those objections were legitimately addressed, with rules that are intended to prevent (or at least reduce and discourage) dangerous relationship complications among people of the opposite sex.
This would have reduced the likelyhood of a heterosexual relationship resulting in the deaths of scores of Naval personnel, as in the USS Iowa explosion (that may have been the result of a gay lover’s quarrel).
All that is needed, in the case of homosexuals in the military, is an equivalent of this kind of solution. But neither you, nor any of the politically correct politicians on your side, nor the military brass ordered by Obama to pretend to support this change, have proposed any such viable means of dealing with the problem.
Instead, it’s just blind denial, which is suicidally dangerous.
November 3, 2010 - 1:21 pm
Frankly, I don’t see the point to writing this comment after you’ve read Brian Singer’s comment that pre-refutes it with combat experience.
April 12, 2012 - 10:38 am
I agree with Kaz, and Brian’s comment is just simple rant performed by one person and one person’s experience accompanied as usual with vulgar language.
I am sure there are other combat experienced individuals who would highly disagree with Brian’s comment.