Gays in the Military

Life LGBTQ+ Forum
21

[quote=“Jack Burton”]I was under the impression that quite a few on this board served in their armed forces, so it would be illuminating they might share their own knowledge/experience as former soldiers (and by that, I don’t mean outing themselves, etc. but what they saw and heard from actual soldiers in the field)

Frankly, I’d rather have real soldiers tell me, not consultants, politicians, arm-chair generals.[/quote]

I was in the Marine Corps (1971-75) and the Navy (1981-85). I was never in combat.

I don’t recall it being a real issue at any time in any unit I was in, or in the Marine Corps in general. In the Marines, someone once told me a rumor that someone in our unit was gay, but it was just a rumor.

As to cohesiveness: Unlike TC, I’ve never been in combat, so maybe I’m not as qualified as he is to speak of cohesiveness, since it’s arguably not as important outside a combat zone. Also, my understanding is that TC was a good soldier (no sarcasm) whereas I was not a very good Marine, was mildly rebellious, and never advanced beyond corporal. My MOS in the Marines was 0331, which is infantry, but I also spent a couple of years in a guard unit. My impression of the Marines at that time, both in two infantry units and in the guard unit, was that cohesion was not very relevant. I’m not making light of the idea of cohesiveness, and I expect that the Marine Corps has changed in the 33 years since I got out, but except in boot camp, unit cohesiveness just didn’t seem to be a big issue in our lives. I should add that my first infantry unit had a lot of Vietnam veterans in it, and they didn’t seem to care much for cohesiveness either. They did seem to cohere to some extent by virtue of having combat experience in common, but that was mostly at the personal level.

As to morale, each of us seemed to have his own flavor of that, according to personal tastes.

My experience in the Navy was similar in some regards. Again, I was not a very good sailor; once in a while I got into minor trouble, and I never even attained petty officer (NCO) rank. I spent two years as a deck seaman on a guided missile destroyer, and the issue of this thread was not a real issue there, and I don’t recall it being a real issue in the Navy in general.

As to how the Marines and sailors that I was with would have responded to openly gay persons in the unit: I don’t know. I suspect that some would have been hostile, but that most would have accepted it and that things would eventually have wound up pretty much the same as before. But again, I don’t really know.

22

[quote=“the chief”]GudDAMN HO-moes.
I say we gather them all up, put them in one place together, cut their hair off, make 'em dress all the same, force them to be doing something every minute of the day, not let them have any free time, feed 'em crappy food, take away their privacy, keep them under lock and key except for real special occasions, refuse to let them think or act as individuals, and maybe, just maybe, force them to go into really dangerous situations where they might even get killed!!
THAT oughta teach 'em…[/quote]

Huh? Gay English teachers? Whatchu talkin about?

23

Charlie Jack -

Well with 4 Article 15’s and 3 refusals of a commission, I would have had to change units if I did not stay on EM status (E-6, although I made E-7 once) on my DD214, I will humbly accept your compliment… :uhhuh:

Yeah, I think we’re saying the same thing - It depends on the individuals involved. Personally, IMO the military is not designed to be a ‘gay’ friendly place but people understand they have to get along and they deal with it.
During my time in, alcohol abuse was a much larger problem. Times were shifting from a culture of acceptance to a culture of realizing that alcoholism was a disease that required recognition and treatment.
A lot of posters about it - “If you drink a lot of beer YOU drink a lot!” was a favorite I still remember seeing.

Funny thing, we had cold beer available in the pop machines in the CQ office and the day rooms.

24

Yea, among the soldiers I know, boredom and substance abuse seemed to them the biggest issue. They served in Persian Gulf in the Navy (Iraq 1), but guessing there was no direct/close combat as they served on a aircraft carrier.

25

:America: God Bless America! :America:

26

[quote=“TainanCowboy”]Charlie Jack -

Well with 4 Article 15’s and 3 refusals of a commission, I would have had to change units if I did not stay on EM status (E-6, although I made E-7 once) on my DD214, I will humbly accept your compliment… :uhhuh:

Yeah, I think we’re saying the same thing - It depends on the individuals involved. Personally, IMO the military is not designed to be a ‘gay’ friendly place but people understand they have to get along and they deal with it.
During my time in, alcohol abuse was a much larger problem. Times were shifting from a culture of acceptance to a culture of realizing that alcoholism was a disease that required recognition and treatment.
A lot of posters about it - “If you drink a lot of beer YOU drink a lot!” was a favorite I still remember seeing.

Funny thing, we had cold beer available in the pop machines in the CQ office and the day rooms.[/quote]

Good post! And my compliment still stands.

27

My experience was that a gay soldier can give covering or suppression fire just as effectively as a straight one. Courage, pulling a trigger and listening to commands has less to do with where you put your dick than having a good index finger and discipline. It’s much ado about nothing and is as ignorant as when they said blacks couldn’t be fighter pilots because they had “poor night vision” or some such codswallop.

For me it’s more ridiculous that as an 18 year old you can get your ass shot off for king and country, but you’re not legally allowed to have a pint. Now that’s just f***ed up!

28

If I was a guy I would have issues showering with gays. Maybe it’s just a personal thing. I was in an all girls school and always went to dress in a toilet cubicle. I felt that I shouldn’t see other girls naked because I was basically a guy. It’s not fair towards them.

but then again…you guys pee next to each other. Off topic a bit…but how do you guys feel about that? I would have hated to be a guy and have to do that in front of strangers…

29

Well, some of us feel “pee-shyness,” others experience a sort of cameraderie thereby, while still others feel both at once.

Camille Paglia once described the “arc of transcendence” which she said characterizes the act of male urination. In other words, by standing up to piss, we are expressing our domination over women. (Paglia’s not complaining–that actually turns her on.) This explains that new style of urinal for bars, that comes in the shape of a woman’s lips.

But gays in the military? I think that’s great. Then if we lost, we could just say “Well that’s nothing, you just beat a bunch of poofs!”

On the other hand there are moments when it would be awkward. Like on those cold nights in the field, when you have to huddle close for warmth…

“Hey soldier! How’d you like to spend some time in the HOLE?!!”

30

There’s an unwritten code of etiquette to that. Look straight ahead, don’t speak, don’t occupy the urinal next to someone else unless there’s absolutely no other choice, and never ever “sneak a peek”!

31

. . . and never, but never, turn to face someone if in conversation while midstream.

HG

32

There’s an unwritten code of etiquette to that. Look straight ahead, don’t speak, don’t occupy the urinal next to someone else unless there’s absolutely no other choice, and never ever “sneak a peek”![/quote]

There was a cool flash game going around the internet that quizzed you on the knowledge of this code of etiquette when using public urinals (ie which urinal to use when there are 1 or more people using a fixed number of urinals given the location of the door, etc.)

33

There’s an unwritten code of etiquette to that. Look straight ahead, don’t speak, don’t occupy the urinal next to someone else unless there’s absolutely no other choice, and never ever “sneak a peek”![/quote]

Yet, in Taiwan, none of that applies. There’ll be fifty urinals free and Jonny Taiwan will still come stand next to you, try to make conversation AND sneak a peek.

34

here’s another historical example that shows homosexual couples in military units may be a superior fighting force:

The Sacred Band of Thebes (ancient Greek: 'Ιερός Λόχος τῶν Θηβῶν Hierós Lókhos tón Thebón) was a troop of picked soldiers, numbering 150 age-structured pairs which formed the elite force of the Theban army in the 4th century BC.[1] It was organized by the Theban commander Gorgidas in 378 BC and it played a crucial role in the Battle of Leuctra, and was completely annihilated in the Battle of Chaeronea in 338 BC.

[quote]Plutarch reports that the Sacred Band consisted of homosexual couples and the reason was that lovers would fight more fiercely and more cohesively at each other’s sides than would strangers with no ardent bonds. So according to Plutarch (in his Life of Pelopidas[2]), the inspiration for the Band’s formation came from Plato’s Symposium, wherein the character Phaedrus remarks:

And if there were only some way of contriving that a state or an army should be made up of lovers and their loves, they would be the very best governors of their own city, abstaining from all dishonour, and emulating one another in honour; and when fighting at each other's side, although a mere handful, they would overcome the world. For what lover would not choose rather to be seen by all mankind than by his beloved, either when abandoning his post or throwing away his arms? He would be ready to die a thousand deaths rather than endure this. Or who would desert his beloved or fail him in the hour of danger?
—[3]

The Sacred Band originally was formed of picked men in couples, each lover and beloved, selected from the ranks of the existing Theban citizen-army. The pairs consisted of the older “heniochoi”, or charioteers, and the younger “paraibatai”, or companions. They were housed and trained at the city’s expense.[4] During their early engagements, in an attempt to bolster a general morale, they were dispersed by their commander Gorgidas throughout the front ranks of the Theban army.[/quote]

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sacred_Band_of_Thebes

35

What’s worse is the old cleaning ladies who feel the urge to mop suspiciously close to you while you’re in action. Always freaks me out. :astonished:

Jack Burton, it seems strange that a 1st century AD Roman historian would know something about a 4th century BC Greek military group which none of the contemporary Greek historians knew, nor even any of the later Greek historians. As Plutarch is the only source for this, and as there is no corroborating primary or secondary source, and as Plutarch’s claim seems to be based on his desire to find a real life counterpart of an unrealized idea of Plato, it’s difficult to credit this as a historical fact.

The whole issue of ‘gays in the military’ in ancient Greece is fraught with historical and literary difficulties, including lack of sources, misinterpretation of sources, and over reliance on very late sources which are uncorroborated. Not to mention the fact that the Greeks did not necessarily equate pederasty with homosexuality. There is evidence that an actual desire for the physical pleasures of the body of one’s fellow soldier was considered obscene by the Spartans, and that the pederastic bond should be spiritual. A number of historical commentators differentiate between ancient Greek pederasty and modern day ‘androphilia’ (what we refer to as homosexuality).

There’s also the fact that pederasty in Greece was not predicated on self-identification as a homosexual. It was lifestyle and behaviour choice, which sexual identity is not. It was a form of social conditioning.

36

What’s worse is the old cleaning ladies who feel the urge to mop suspiciously close to you while you’re in action. Always freaks me out. :astonished:

Jack Burton, it seems strange that a 1st century AD Roman historian would know something about a 4th century BC Greek military group which none of the contemporary Greek historians knew, nor even any of the later Greek historians. As Plutarch is the only source for this, and as there is no corroborating primary or secondary source, and as Plutarch’s claim seems to be based on his desire to find a real life counterpart of an unrealized idea of Plato, it’s difficult to credit this as a historical fact.

The whole issue of ‘gays in the military’ in ancient Greece is fraught with historical and literary difficulties, including lack of sources, misinterpretation of sources, and over reliance on very late sources which are uncorroborated. Not to mention the fact that the Greeks did not necessarily equate pederasty with homosexuality. There is evidence that an actual desire for the physical pleasures of the body of one’s fellow soldier was considered obscene by the Spartans, and that the pederastic bond should be spiritual. A number of historical commentators differentiate between ancient Greek pederasty and modern day ‘androphilia’ (what we refer to as homosexuality).

There’s also the fact that pederasty in Greece was not predicated on self-identification as a homosexual. It was lifestyle and behaviour choice, which sexual identity is not. It was a form of social conditioning.[/quote]

Your points noted and well taken.

  1. Plutarch: as with most writers of that period, there are a lot of primary sources that are no longer extant on which later writers would “borrow”, quote from, or rely on as reliable data. But yes, Plutarch is not a primary source on the Theban Band, so his credibility can be called into question on that point.

  2. I guess we will never know the true nature of the Greek man-youth bond that existed in many of the Doric societies, and we are left to speculation or reliance on the commentaries of contemporaries and later writers (with a grain of salt), and hope for the best.