By R.J. Beaumia
Imagine Erica Jong writing a piece for Soldier of Fortune magazine about a grunt who suffers from aviaphobia: √íMy fingers (and toes) turn to ice, my stomach leaps up into my rib cage, the temperature in the tip of my nose drops to the same level as the temperature in my fingers, my nipples stand up and salute the inside of my tee-shirt (or in this case, dress uniform shirt — since I√ïm not wearing a tee-shirt)√â√ì
With all apologies to Jong for making a point with a passage from her groundbreaking feminist novel ÒFear of Flying,Ó I would like to hail the PentagonÕs recent decision to reclassify homosexuality from a mental problem (like retardation and personality disorders) to a Òcircumstance.Ó
Yes, my ÒcircumstanceÓ is like a red, red rose, thatÕs newly sprung in Junito. And while IÕm still looking for a long-term Òcircumstance,Ó IÕm not averse to having as many one-night ÒcircumstancesÓ as I can get.
What, exactly, does the Pentagon consider a ÒcircumstanceÓ? Along with homosexuality, ÒcircumstancesÓ are conditions that might lead to an early discharge from the armed forces. The set of conditions includes maladies like fear of flying, bed-wetting, stuttering, dyslexia, sleepwalking, motion sickness, and several others.
It seems that my gay identity keeps getting shifted these days. Just when I was warming up to the idea of taking a box of Trojans and a bottle of JacobÕs Creek Shiraz over to the neighborÕs rottweiler, Rick Santorum loses his Senate seat (You didnÕt think I was going to write a column and not gloat about the election, did you?). Now, overnight, the Pentagon changes me from a sexual Rain Man into a bottom whoÕd better stay away from water beds.
So, even though IÕm crazy for dick, IÕm not crazy because IÕm crazy for it.
The re-classification was in response to criticism the Pentagon received last year from mental health professionals and others. The move does not affect the ÒDonÕt Ask, DonÕt TellÓ policy that allows the discharging of gays and lesbians in the military because of our sexuality.
Proponents of eliminating DADT werenÕt very pleased with the PentagonÕs move.
ÒMore than 30 years after the mental health community declassified homosexuality as a mental disorder, it is disappointing that the Pentagon still continues to mischaracterize it as a Ôdefect,ÕÓ said Rep. Marty Meehan, D-MA, a member of the House Armed Services Committee, according to an Associated Press story.
Meehan will probably be chairman of the House Armed Services Subcommittee when the new Congress convenes in January, and has announced that he will hold hearings seeking the eventual repeal of DADT.
Meehan told the Boston Globe, ÒI believe, and always have believed, that once people see the facts, it will become clear that this is a policy that actually hurts national security and hurts the military.Ó
Like, probably, most of you, I consider DADT yet another vicious and irrational assault on gay and lesbian Americans. It√ïs unjust and undemocratic and even Fred Phelps knows it. The repeal of the policy is inevitable, and will happen, I believe, within the next couple of years or so — if the politics are played right.
Ham-handed politics is the reason DADT exists at all, and if the new Democratic Congress lacks the finesse of good timing and careful rhetoric, then the policy will see a renaissance in the forum of public opinion.
We might have thought weÕd woken up in Oz on November 8, but we were, and still are, unfortunately, very much stuck in Kansas. Our neighbors might have voted Democratic, but they still hated us enough to have soundly voted away our civil rights in several states on Election Day.
Attempting to repeal DADT as soon as the new Congress hits the pavement is nothing more than political suicide.
One of Bill ClintonÕs first moves as president was to fulfill a campaign promise to enact legislation that would allow homosexuals to serve in the U.S. military. The right wing reacted swiftly and stridently, making full use of anti-gay rhetoric that probably helped swing Congress over to the Republicans in 1994.
The compromise measure was ÒDonÕt Ask, DonÕt Tell,Ó one of the most ridiculous, unconstitutional, pernicious pieces of legislation ever enacted. And all that wasted time and money thrown at Congressional hearings so that we could hear a bunch of nonsense about Òunit cohesion.Ó
We all know that Òunit cohesionÓ under DADT has nothing to do with morale amongst troops and everything to do with the fear of one guyÕs unit cohering with another guyÕs butt.
I love Clinton for what he tried to do, but IÕm still angry at him because gay men and women are still paying the price for his bad timing.
If Congressman Meehan and openly-gay Congressman Barney Frank, D-MA, who supports Meehan on the measure, think theyÕre going to get traction with this issue they are, in my opinion, nuts.
Trying to repeal DADT right now, or even holding hearings on the matter, is overambitious and can have a ripple effect not only on gay service members but also on ENDA, marriage, and the countless humiliations and cruelties gays and lesbians experience from state to state, but it can also derail the entire agenda of the new Democratic Congress.
The Boston Globe said that a study conducted by the University of California, Santa Barbara showed that the Pentagon spent $363.8 million to train and replace the nearly 10,000 the military discharged under DADT since its passing. ItÕs also the case that while the military is stretched thin, itÕs still prematurely dismissing valuable personnel under the policy, like former U.S. Army Sergeant Bleu Copas, the Arab linguist.
All of this is bad, thereÕs no getting around it. It makes me furious. This is probably a good time to dispute the efficacy of DADT.
However, I cannot justify jeopardizing the one thing that all Americans need to be intently focused on right now, and that is making sure the Democrats are able to get us out of the quagmire we caused in Iraq.
If we√ïve learned one lesson over the last horrible six years, it√ïs that the Republican Party will use anything, and I mean anything — including the lives of American men and women — as pawns in their game of politics.
We cannot — we must not — allow the Republicans to Clinton-ize this Congress. We must not let them use us and our sexuality to distract the country from the thing that need to be done most urgently, which is to get this country out of this hell wrought by Halliburton.
I want our service people to be allowed to be gay, but I want them to live long enough so that they can come home to do it.
IÕve always wanted to give a really good ÒcircumstanceÓ to a military man to welcome him home.
