by Kevin Sparrow

The history of military service is pervasive in American society, from the early Revolutionary and Civil Wars that fill our History textbooks to the image of Navy sailor passionately kissing a women on his return to shore to the activism sparked by misguided directives of the Vietnam War. As we approach the seventh anniversary of the U.S. invasion of Iraq this month, a secondary issue that has influenced the military for the past 17 years is being hotly debated: the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. A misconceived corrective to keep LGBT service members from being discharged outright, this policy has recently been a focal point for politicians and the public at large as they muddle through a conflict of which many Americans are still critical.

Two polls conducted this past week show that the majority of civilians now support allowing gay, lesbian and bisexual soldiers to serve openly in the military. An ABC News-Washington Post poll shows that 75 percent of respondents would be in favor of homosexual servicemembers serving openly, with a 64 percent support rate from Republican respondents. A CBS News-New York Times poll released the day before shows seven in ten respondents supporting open service by gay and lesbian people. There is a caveat with this data; both polls used “gay and lesbian” and “homosexual” alternately to describe LGBT servicemembers and found respondents were less willing to support “homosexuals” serving openly than “gay and lesbian” people.

This data reveals a positive shift in the perception of openly gay and lesbian people and their commitment to current American values; however, a repeal could easily lead to an acceptance of some troubling fallout from this policy’s history. RaceWire recently pointed out that black women are disproportionately affected by DADT, contributing to 3.3 percent of all discharges based on this policy, but only making up less than one percent of servicemembers. Many of these discharges may not even be based on actual sexual identity or behavior but on perception or vindictiveness by other servicemembers. A repeal of this policy will not help black women in the military generally if they are running up against sexist and racist authorities, but because there is no policy in place keeping them from serving, these slights will be more easily overlooked with a widespread repeal of DADT. By conceding to one minority group’s needs with a very tangible, another’s plight may be diminished.

By repealing DADT and policies that keep openly gay LGBT from serving, we must not forget that there is more that needs to be done to reform the U.S. military. Beyond removing current obstacles, protections need to be put into place that allow all servicemembers to interact in respectful and egalitarian ways. A third recent poll Military Times conducted exclusively with those serving in all branches of the military found that 51 percent of respondents did not support a repeal of DADT policies, a much higher percentage of opposition than the general public. Ensuring that minority servicemembers are accepted by their units and treated with dignity is an important consideration that should influence any new policies going forward. History repeats itself if its lessons are not realized, but we have the opportunity help promote an honorable military that treats all members equally. Hopefully, this lesson is one that works to influence all American society.

Discrimination affects transgender people in the military on a regular basis
by Kevin Sparrow

The military draft was ended in 1973 after the Vietnam War, beginning an era of an all-volunteer service. The dramatic increase in the number of female enlistees grew substantially, from 1.6 per cent in 1973 to 10.8 per cent by 1989. Gender has long played a role in the types of jobs women can receive in the military and has hindered their advancement, but as more women are allowed to serve in combat and continue to challenge the status quo, these problems are decreasing. However, gender still plays a discriminatory role in the military when it comes to transgender people. Most transgender men and women are barred from military service based on the medical condition of Gender Identity Disorder, seen as a psychological problem in the military. In addition, servicemembers who are non-gender conforming are disproportionately discharged under Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, although around 50 per cent of transgender people identify as heterosexual. This means they might not receive an honorable discharge, and they will lose many military benefits if they decide to transition after leaving the service.

Although the classification of Gender Identity Disorder as a mental condition in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual used by the American Psychological Association is currently a means the military uses to keep transgender people from service, its removal is not necessarily a desired outcome. Denny Meyer, the media spokesperson for the Transgender Americans Veterans Association explains, “In one sense, T people want the diagnosis because it does not imply there’s anything wrong with them, as most diagnoses do. In this case, it’s the realization you’re just in the wrong sex. The cure is not a mental one but a physical one,” as most doctors diagnose it now. Were the status to change, the medical treatment and surgery to transition from one gender to the other might be treated more cosmetically and Veteran’s Affairs hospitals would most likely refuse to help in any treatment of transgender veterans.

TAVA feels that the main task to accomplish is the repeal of DADT as it is an even grosser injustice for transgender people who do not identify as homosexual or bisexual; in these instances, identity is taken out of the hands of the individual. According to TAVA President Monica Helms, “We know that transgender people have been kicked out under DADT because the military can’t tell the difference between sexual orientation and gender identity and expression. They think a straight man who might like to cross dress on leave or at home, is gay. They can’t see anything beyond that.” Unfortunately, there have been no challenges to these unfair dismissals.

In order to put a stop to discharges that adversely affect both servicemembers and the military, we need to urge military action not only against DADT but in favor of transgender issues as well. “It’s not necessarily working from the top down or the bottom up, but it’s more like trying to find a weak opening in the middle somewhere and going in that way,” says Helms. “Remember, we were in the military. In order to form a plan to attack, you have to find your enemy’s weaknesses. The [Department of Defense] is not our enemy, but there are still weaknesses and ways to get around them. They still have to answer to Congress, and we have allies in Congress that would be willing to work with us on this.” TAVA recently worked with The Palm Center, a think tank located at UC-Santa Barbara that influences public policy on sexuality and gender issues relating to the military, to create a survey of transgender veterans and their experiences both in service and afterward. This allowed some momentum for changes to begin taking place.

Secondly, it takes advocacy by allied individuals. Helms states, “We do have people who have actually served a portion of their military time as they began transitioning. DADT is a command-based issue; if the commander doesn’t think being gay is a big deal, and they want to keep the person because they’re a good worker, they’re not going to make an issue of their sexual orientation. The same with transgender people. If the commander understands the issue, they’re going to find ways around it.” This helps keep active and competent people in jobs where they are needed, and actions such as these can be used as examples for future policy decisions.