Don't Ask, Don't Tell (and its depiction last night in Grey's Anatomy)

[Lul Thyme]

Asher (or anyone really) :
I'd really like someone to answer this "If he had a female partner (but not official, say a girlfriend) in a similar situation, would he have been able to go see her without going AWOL?"

[Elok]

Come to think of it, aren't relationships between comrades-in-arms discouraged, regardless of their respective bits n' pieces? I remember Lynndie England wasn't supposed to be screwing that Graner fellow...

[Lonestar]

Originally posted by Elok
Come to think of it, aren't relationships between comrades-in-arms discouraged, regardless of their respective bits n' pieces? I remember Lynndie England wasn't supposed to be screwing that Graner fellow...

Yup. Officially it's okay if they are of equal rank and not in the same Chain of Command, but the CO on my ship vowed that anyone having any relationship on the vessel, regardless of what the regs actually said, would get a "Significant Problems" Eval.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
I don't see any reason why they should expect preferential treatment from the military, it should be irrelevant to the performance of their duty.

Why is it preferential treatment to receive equal treatment?

You have a very distorted view of the world.

I can't serve in the military due to disability.

A mental one, assuredly.

IIRC you have a hearing disability. This makes sense to forbid such soldiers -- if you can't hear orders all the time, you're not that much use in uniform.

This is a terrible comparison for a few obvious reasons -- Gays are allowed to serve, they just have to keep in the closet the whole time. People with hearing disabilities can't do this, for obvious reasons. There is a physical and practical reasons for this "ban".

On the other hand, gays can be (and are) physically competent soldiers.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Lul Thyme
Asher (or anyone really) :
I'd really like someone to answer this "If he had a female partner (but not official, say a girlfriend) in a similar situation, would he have been able to go see her without going AWOL?"

Yes

[Patroklos]

If he had a female partner (but not official, say a girlfriend) in a similar situation, would he have been able to go see her without going AWOL?

It depends on the needs of the command. If you are deployed, then no.

Yes

The expert speaks. No, they wouldn't. You are only assured special liberty for immediate family members, and then it depends on the type of surgery, remember that military members are not sent back home for child births. In addition that just means they will make every reasonable effort, you can't always get back in time for immediate medical emergencies but they will get you back as soon as possible. Planes and ships only move so fast. We sent several sailors home the last time out.

Without having seen the show, I am not so sure what the level of the relationship was, but as Asher describes it seems to have been a marriage level relatiohship which means that they were denied the same privelage a straight couple would have because they obviouly can't get married to qualify as immediate family.

The problem is that there's no difference between what DADT and pre-DADT, because the military continues to "ask" in spite of the policy against it and interprets "tell" to include being told by a third party

The above statement is absolutely false. In fact, the training on this policy that is mandatory for all hands every year (I just had it last week) goes out of its way to make it clear the above is not the case.

There are only three things that will get you discharged, and then only if it is in the interests of the military (they don't have to discharge you).

1.) Admission.
2.) Homosexual acts (this means sex only)
3.) Marriage or attempted marriage.

You can be as campy (or whatever other steriotypical gay behavior you think the steriotypical right-wing zealot might vidictively report) as you want and nothing official will come of it.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Patroklos
Without having seen the show, I am not so sure what the level of the relationship was, but as Asher describes it seems to have been a marriage level relatiohship which means that they were denied the same privelage a straight couple would have because they obviouly can't get married to qualify as immediate family.

That's clearly the other issue, isn't it.

There are only three things that will get you discharged, and then only if it is in the interests of the military (they don't have to discharge you).

1.) Admission.
2.) Homosexual acts (this means sex only)
3.) Marriage or attempted marriage.

Does oral sex/handjobs count as sex only? I suspect if they are permitted this is the "Navy Clause".

In all seriousness, how pathetic is it that your nation has classes in its military on how to avoid being gay. This kind of **** is what you'd expect out of Iran, but here it is in your own military...

[Apocalypse]

Being an officer in the army, I have a lot of power over if a Soldier can take off time due to any number of things.
My unit is about to deploy, so this makes it even more relevant.

If it was a girlfriend, then no, he couldn't stay behind.

Same for a close friend.

For fiancees, it would really depend on the relationship.

For wives or immediate family members, these people would be put on the "trail" party, which would give them maybe three or four weeks at most.

Furthermore....

In the month and a half before you deploy, there really isn't much to do. Most of your vehicles and equipment is on a ship. Presuming the Soldier is deployable and has current qualifications and whatnot, I wouldn't have a problem giving half-days to anyone with a good reason (like seeing a dying friend) as long as the Soldier isn't a **** bag and still needs help getting his **** together.

[Patroklos]

Does oral sex/handjobs count as sex only? I suspect if they are permitted this is the "Navy Clause".

I should have said sexual acts. There are no branch specific regulations in regards to Don't Ask Don't Tell.

In all seriousness is it, how pathetic is it that your nation has classes in its military on how to avoid being gay.

That of course is not what the training is doing. You probably find it pathetic regardless, but no reason to misscharacterize it.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Patroklos
That of course is not what the training is doing. You probably find it pathetic regardless, but no reason to misscharacterize it.

So how is training that tells you not to have sex with other males not telling people how to avoid being gay.

[Patroklos]

So how is training that tells you not to have sex with other males not telling people how to avoid being gay.

When it tells you to do that, get back to me. What is says is that if you are keep it in your private life. The first slide of the training, which I myself find stupid, is that you can be gay in the military as long as you don't do any of the three things I listed above (and they would have to prove #2 or #3). I have a nagging suspicion that you haven't actually read the policy.

And it is your position that by not having sex with males you are automatically not gay?

In any case, I am at home for mother's day, when I get back to work tomarrow I will see if I can find the training slides on the LAN so you can see exactlty what we are getting.

[Jon Miller]

My brother said that in basic even admission wasn't enough to get you out. It pretty much had to be explicit sex...

This was back in 2000 or 1999 though.

JM

[Asher]

Originally posted by Patroklos

When it tells you to do that, get back to me. What is says is that if you are keep it in your private life.

Cool. So soldiers can have lots of sex outside of the base with other men, and if the military finds out it can't do anything about it?

And it is your position that by not having sex with males you are automatically not gay?

By being forbidden to have sex with other men, you cannot be gay.

You can make the argument that you can be gay and not have sex with men, but I don't buy it -- if that is a gay man, it's an unhealthy gay man. No, to be gay involves sexual interaction.

In any case, I am at home for mother's day, when I get back to work tomarrow I will see if I can find the training slides on the LAN so you can see exactlty what we are getting.

I don't care how they spin it. The training is how to train people to suppress their sexuality, plain and simple. I'm not surprised that most military men can't figure out why this is evil.

[Patroklos]

My brother said that in basic even admission wasn't enough to get you out. It pretty much had to be explicit sex...

An investigation is required for any of the three. An admission that is obviously just a ploy to void your contract will be punished like any other such lie like faked sleep walking/talking.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Patroklos


An investigation is required for any of the three. An admission that is obviously just a ploy to void your contract will be punished like any other such lie like faked sleep walking/talking.

Again -- how pathetic is it that when someone accuses another person of being gay in the military, it launches an investigation.

This is the kind of **** you'd expect straight out of Iran...(no pun intended)