NYT Gays in UK Military Story Omits MoD Bullying Reports

(Photo credit: Rainbow flag, with UK Ministry of Defence symbol superimposed.)

The New York Times today prints a very positive article about the generally favorable acceptance of open gay people in the armed forces of the United Kingdom.

From the Times:

Since the British military began allowing homosexuals to serve in the armed forces in 2000, none of its fears — about harassment, discord, blackmail, bullying or an erosion of unit cohesion or military effectiveness — have come to pass, according to the Ministry of Defense, current and former members of the services and academics specializing in the military. The biggest news about the policy, they say, is that there is no news. It has for the most part become a nonissue.

However, a check of the minutes for the gay steering committee of the UK Ministry of Defence documents that at its May 7 meeting, there is indeed a problem, and it may be expanding. Was the NYT reporter unaware of these minutes from earlier this month?

Excerpted from the LGBT steering committee files:

The committee members discussed harassment and bullying by some military people attending courses or workshops to which our members attended recently, and this seems to be getting worse. Chris mentioned about 2 incidents he witnessed whilst taking a recent training course. Ian mentioned an incident during which he challenged homophobic remarks also.

Further searching the ministry's web site, I found another recent publication, giving historical background to some of the problems gay have faced in the UK armed forces.

From a MoD diversity panel briefing paper:

o In a survey I conducted in Summer 04 of LGB staff, nearly two-thirds had directly experienced homophobic abuse at work.
o This abuse included homophobic joke telling, malicious phone calls at home, use of homophobic language such as queer, dyke or poof, being told by a line manager that being gay was “perverse and disgusting”, pamphlets being left in toilets reminding people that AIDS is the wrath of God against homosexuality and so on.
o The Steering Committee has requested the Equalities directors from both the Defence Academy and dbLearning to attend the December LGBT Forum to advise on how sexual orientation is covered in MoD diversity training.
o We will continue to raise the profile of the LGBT Forum in order to generate a more inclusive culture within the MoD.

Despite those problems, I don't want to overlook what appears to be a generally favorable and tolerant military environment for gays in the UK forces. I give two snaps up to the Ministry of Defence for maintaining a very informative and comprehensive web site full of resources for the gay community and the ministry. Click here to check it out.

When, not if, the US gets around to joining the modern and civilized world of nations that allow gays to serve openly, we could learn a lot from the UK experience of integrating gays into the forces.

White House: Bush "Appreciates the Sacrifices" of Gay Soldiers in Iraq?

Am I reading this right? At the March 13 White House press briefing with Bush advisor Dan Bartlett, the administration acknowledged the honorable gay and lesbian members of our forces in Iraq and also stated the president appreciates their sacrifices?

This seems like a small symbolic step forward in the struggle to bring US military policies over homosexuals on par with those of other NATO countries, without America suffering in her security one bit. I'll make the good people at the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network, who are doing the heavy lifting required for equality in the armed forces, aware of Barlett's statement, just in case they missed it. My mind wonders if there have been other Bush advisors who've made similar supportive remarks about our brothers and sisters in Iraq.

Well, if gay and lesbian bodies, and blood, are good enough for Bush to appreciate in his war on Iraq, why the hell can't the ban on gays in the military be lifted?

Actually, that's a weird sentence, since I really don't want to do a thing to help Bush get more meat for his grinding wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, but you get my point about gay equality and the military.

From the White House:

Press Briefing by Dan Bartlett, Counselor to the President
Filing Center
Holiday Inaugural
Meacuterida, Mexico

2:00 P.M. (Local)

MR. BARTLETT: Good afternoon, everyone. I'll start with a few brief comments, before I take your questions. [...]

Q Does the President condone the remarks about homosexuality by General Pace? And has he asked for him to apologize?

MR. BARTLETT: Well, President Bush has been informed about those remarks. He's also been informed about the comments that he has made as far as clarifying, that he made it very clear that his personal views on this matter has no influence on the policy of the United States government. The "don't ask, don't tell" policy has been longstanding, one the President supports, for reasons why the Department of Defense has often described for operational considerations. So he thought it was appropriate for the Chairman to make that clear distinction today in the statement that went out just shortly ago. [...]

Q Can I ask a question -- switching gears -- on General Pace? What message do thousands of gays in the military right now serving in Iraq -- what should they take from General Pace's message regarding mortality, when their lives are on the line --

MR. BARTLETT: I have no way to identify whether your premise is right about how many people are serving in Iraq, but all I can say is the President appreciates the sacrifice and service of every service member, and what they're doing on a daily basis to improve the situation on the ground and we can accomplish our goals there.

DoD's Gates Interview: "Responsibility to Execute" Anti-Gay Policy

No surprise here. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates was interviewed today by the Pentagon Channel and expressed continued support for barring open gays and lesbians from serving in the military. I really get the sense that Gates and Gen. Peter Pace would rather continue losing the Iraqi war than allow gay and lesbian people aid our country in an hour of need.

Click here to read the full transcript of the Gates interview.

And here is an excerpt from the Armed Forces Press Service story about the interview and the antigay policy:

The top civilian and military leaders in the Defense Department today expressed support for the current “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy barring openly gay people from military service.

“It is my responsibility to execute that policy as effectively as we can as long as the law is what it is; that’s what we’ll do,” Defense Secretary Robert Gates said in an interview with the Pentagon Channel. [...]

Gates said personal opinion has no bearing in enforcing the current law.

“What’s important is that we have a law, a statute that governs don’t ask, don’t tell, and that’s the policy of this department,” [(sic) left blank by Dod.mil web site.] ...

The law allows people to serve regardless of sexual orientation as long as they don’t engage in homosexual acts or disclose their homosexual orientation. It also prohibits harassment based on sexual harassment and forbids “witch hunts” into individuals’ sexual orientation.

Pace said yesterday that he believes homosexual activity is immoral and works against good order and discipline in the services. [...]

The don’t ask, don’t tell policy is based on conduct, not orientation, Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman said today. “DoD expects all servicemembers to be treated with dignity and respect all the time,” he said. “Any harassment is unacceptable and will not be tolerated.”

Servicemembers receive training on the law and attend classes on preventing harassment.

Congress enacted the “don’t ask, don’t tell, don’t pursue” law in March 1994. It provides that engaging in homosexual conduct is grounds for discharge from the military. The law also says that service by those who have a propensity to engage in homosexual conduct creates an unacceptable risk to morale, good order, discipline and unit cohesion.

But the law also says, “sexual orientation is a personal and private matter that is not a bar to military service unless manifested by homosexual conduct.”

Under don’t ask, don’t tell, don’t pursue:

-- Servicemembers are not to ask about others’ sexual orientation;

-- Servicemembers should not reveal their sexual orientation; and

-- Commanders could not engage in investigations with the sole purpose of finding out a servicemember’s sexual orientation.

Did Anti-Gay Gen. Pace Give to Sen. Helms in 1991?

Gen. Peter Pace yesterday told the Chicago Tribune that he doesn't think courageous gay and lesbian people should serve in the U.S. military because they're supposedly "immoral" and incompatible with the armed services. Well, you know me, I like to check newsmakers' donations to federal candidates, so I did a search for "Pace, Peter" and his FEC records.

This is what came back at both NewsMeat.com and PoliticalMoneyLine:

Name: Pace, Peter
Location: Raleigh, NC

Date: August 8, 1991
Donation: $250
Candidate: Sen. Jesse Helms

Since there's nothing indicating this man may be the same military leader today trashing gay and lesbian soldiers, and the original paper FEC report from the Helms committee is not on the web, to see if there's anything in it showing the 1991 donation was from a military officer, I'm not sure this donation was from Gen. Pace. Anyone know if Pace has made federal or state political donations?

On the other hand, another military officer in the news today, Major General Gale Pollock, appointed as Acting Surgeon General of the Army, gave $250 on December 6, 1999, to a health care related PAC, the American Association of Nurse Anesthetists Fund.

Of course, Pollock's political giving, such as it is, gives no indication of her political leanings.