Error: Unable to create directory uploads/2018/11. Is its parent directory writable by the server?

The Military’s Logical Policy: People Who Are Likely to Sleep Together, Don’t Sleep Together

Posted on February 22 2010 3:31 pm
David Forsmark is the owner and president of Winning Strategies, a full service political consulting firm in Michigan. David has been a regular columnist for Frontpage Magazine since 2006. For 20 years before that, he wrote book, movie and concert reviews as a stringer for the Flint Journal, a midsize daily newspaper.
Be Sociable, Share!
Print This Post Print This Post

As John R. Guardiano nears the end of his excellent series,Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, and Don’t Even Pretend to Be Fair, he approaches the real life practical problem that dare not speak its name in regards to with open homosexuality and military service—that this is a serious logistical problem for the military which would break down the rationale for non-fraternization and for separate sex quarters.

The discussion of gays in the military invariably focuses on all the wrong things.  The media polls the American people—99.9% of whom will never be effected by the issue.  Public attitudes toward homosexuality—or even the attitudes of members of the military toward homosexuality—is most certainly not the point, though even my personal hero Dick Cheney is taking this posture.

Moral positions on homosexuality are also not the point.  Our libertarian lioness J.E. Tabler posts that the ban just seems to archaic and old fashioned, a Victorian prejudice in this modern age.  We should just get over it.

The real life point is, that a foxhole is the last place you need sexual tension.

That is why we don’t have co-ed barracks and showers.  The response of gay activists tends to run toward the taunt of “Don’t flatter yourself, soldier,” or the like.  But one does not have to be convinced of his own attractiveness to want a certain amount of sexual modesty.

This is essentially problem with gay scoutmasters.  The argument from the activists comes back that those of us who back the Scouts on this issue are accusing all homosexuals of being pedophiles.  By this line of reasoning, I should be able to take Girl Scouts on a camping trip because I’m not into underage girls.

For the purposes of this discussion, homosexuals and heterosexuals of the same gender, are in effect opposite sexes.  I would not feel comfortable sharing quarters with the world’s ugliest woman– whether she thought much of me, or not.  That kind of natural modesty is both proper and ingrained in most people.

J.E. Tabler does bring up a valid point about recruiting linguists, and this can apply to other non-combat positions.  There has never been much contention, for instance, about homosexuals serving in civilian capacity in the Pentagon.

But it DOES matter more than if you shoot straight, J.E.  There is little that is more important to a combat outfit than unit cohesion.  Open sexual attraction is not just inappropriate here, it’s likely deadly.

Moreover, the small town, macho-oriented young men the military must be able to recruit to have effective combat units are not terribly likely to cotton to Obama’s brave new world of close quarters.  Heck, the NBA and the NFL locker rooms are not exactly gay-friendly, and they do not even approach the forced intimacy of a combat unit.

The problem, however, is determining when to segregate.  This would require discrimination—in the old fashioned, positive sense.  Discrimination means being able to tell the difference, and knowing with the difference MATTERS.  Bigotry is seeing differences when there are none.

Political correctness has banished discrimination along with bigotry.  That makes the problems with Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell darn near insoluble.

Be Sociable, Share!
19 Responses leave one →

Leave a Reply

Note: You can use basic XHTML in your comments. Your email address will never be published.

Subscribe to this comment feed via RSS

Copyright 2018 NewsReal Blog

The Theme Foundry