Arguably more practically meaningful than any Nobel Prize

[major_clanger]

I'm very pleased to see that President Obama has done the decent and right thing and pledged to end the ban on gays serving openly in the US military.

For the first half of my service in the RAF it was illegal to be gay. Suspected homosexuals were investigated by the RAF Police (a degrading process for all involved, as well as a gross waste of time and effort) and summarily discharged if found out. The policy was not only offensive but was counter-productive on a range of levels, not least in terms of inducing gay service personnel into the worst behaviour possible in anyone with a security clearance - hiding an aspect of one's life.

Then a combination of Labour winning power and an ECHR ruling brought not just the end of the ban but an enforced positive duty on the chain of command to foster tolerance and tackle discrimination. And, the military being comprised largely of people trained to do as they are told, it worked. I served alongside openly gay personnel, including fairly senior officers, and in a step unthinkable fifteen years ago the MOD sponsored personnel in uniform to take part in Gay Pride.

The US Armed Forces like to think that they are the best in the world. So presumably if the Limeys can make this work, so can they. I just hope it's not spun out or done via half-measures; the British experience is that a quick about-turn - pardon the pun - is the way to make it work.

Comments

[don-fitch.livejournal.com]

This might be of some help in understanding:

I worked for several decades under Civil Service (for Los Angeles County). It's possible to fire someone -- but with great difficulty after the first year. It's relatively easy to make anyone's job so unpleasant that the person has no practical option but to resign, and to do this in ways that aren't provably motivated by (illegal) prejudice.

I also spent 18 months as a Draftee in the Army (c. 1950), where the same principle was in operation -- although, that being wartime, the effect was more like punishment with no opt-out.

It seems to me that we do need a trident, here -- a CiC who recognizes that members of racial & cultural minorities, women, and gays (insofar as they don't fall in the "cultural minority" category) can be as capable as anyone else at handling military duties; an upper-level military establishment that recognizes the same thing; and Congressional Laws that close loopholes and tie up loose ends, to reduce the possibility of it being reversed if/when the individuals in charge change.

I think the best solution is to join the rest of the civilized world in prohibiting discrimination -- everywhere -- on the basis of sexual orientation, and that the only valid way of doing this is to establish explicit Laws to that effect. Not that The Law ever works perfectly, of course, but it seems to be the necessary beginning, and I think it's shameful that the U.S. hasn't done this long ago.

[ciphergoth.livejournal.com]

Sure, I think it's great that we have full-on anti-discrimination legislation over here; but until that day comes to the USA, simply repealing the explicitly homophobic parts of the military code would be a huge step forward for LGBT people in uniform.