how doesthe dont ask dont tell policy for gays in the military affect civil society?

I'll answer this from my personal experience but it's far from the gospel and some would disagree. The only thing that DADT/DHDP (Don't harass/Don't pursue) did was allow legal enlistment for homosexual sailors, soldiers and airmen. That is it nothing more. While it is no longer legal for a C.O. or anyone to verbally question a person about their sex life outside of when pertinent to a criminal investigation, it has led to more widespread speculation about who is or isn't. it is still something that is discussed around the water cooler. It is still frowned upon by far too many people, especially the old timers who are in the positions of authority. I did not change the fact that a homosexual can not have an openly gay relationship, or provide the same basic rights straight enlistees have.

For example I was stationed in a joint command near a naval sub base. It wasn't uncommon to go see disembarkment when they came in. You would see slews of families awaiting as well and all the public display of affection that goes on with the reunion- however not by gay sailors and their partners. They cannot risk it. They cannot take their partner to formal or informal caommand functions as a straight person can as their partner, but simply as a friend and even then they leave themself open to repercussions. A homosexual couple on active duty- even if committed long term cannot request joint assignments based on their partnership as straight couples can. They cannot pursue a civil union and either stay in. They cannot enjoy the financial benefits, or even have garuntee of housing benefits as they have to apply to move off base, list roommates, etc... and can be denied this which does happen solely on the speculation of being homosexual at times. They cannot get base housing together outside of room swapping in the dorms usually. There is no right to dependant pay. Basically a homosexual in the armed forces has LESS rights even with this hollow policy than a straight soldier.

Now even further with the inability to ask and pursue a person suspected of being homosexual for purposes of removing from active duty- some- and yes there are documented cases- have had to suffer through being assigned duties in an unfair/unwarranted manner, having lower than deserved evaluations, indirect harrasment, etc...for the purposes of pressuring the person to seek early termination of service, transfer, or to take administrative actions for removal due to non-perfromance/failure to advance. I've seen it personally. I've experienced it to some degree.

now with all that said it sends the perception out to the civil sector that it is okay to act in a likewise manner (even though legally prohibited in most states) when it comes to LGBT issues and practices in hiring and treatment of such people. it sends a not too subtle message that the gov. feels these people to be flawed, defective, or inferior in such a way they are incapable of properly carrying out a job. It conveys a belief that these are second class citizens. Fortunately the civil sector is profit driven and in these days Most- certainly not all, but most are more concerned with a persons ability to advance the profit margin than whom they sleep with. It is a terrible, outdated, neolithic, discriminatory train of thought that has managed to reamin in the government brain far too long.

to me this is a complicated question so i will give a somewhat complex answer. the opinion i express is my own.

i would say that the dont ask dont tell policy tells the tale of how society feels in general about homosexuality. dont ask- this to me says dont ask questions that you are not prepared to hear the answer to.

dont tell- to me this says that those of a sexual orientation other than hetrosexual should hide their preferance from those in power. this also to me sets up a policy of tolerance for hate crimes, you see if a person says i got beaten because i am gay in the military then who gets punished? the person that is gay gets punished. the person that commited the hate crime may verry well be able to remain in the military while the person thats gay has their life ruined for reporting a hate crime. this to me tells the rest of society that if the goverment will allow this sort of thing then it must be acceptable for everyone to act in such a manner. but as i said this is personal opinion so take it as such, opinion and not fact.

somewhat it is in comparison to countless different interest. there are particular policies in place that restrict homosexuals from overtly serving interior the defense force. opposite to well-known thought, it somewhat isn't any longer discrimination to exclude human beings from a activity if an company can prepare reason as to why they're different than some. An occasion of that's in police departments. Police companies have the criminal real to set age limits on new recruits, no longer because of the fact they're bodily incapable of doing the interest, yet because of the fact it somewhat is been shown many situations interior the previous that older recruits tend to no longer stay with the corporate for as long and consequently they are not getting as lots from them for the quantity of money they put in. there have been many documented circumstances of older recruits using to police departments and getting employed and then going interior the process the education, yet quitting days formerly graduating, thereby permitting them to no longer would desire to pay back the money in education costs. the main straightforward reason given for doing this became that they "needed to be sure in the event that they'd do it." On ordinary, it costs $10-20,000 to coach an entire time police officer, so in case you have a team of older recruits actual "using" the dep., then that's distinctive taxpayer money out the window. i'm going to allow you realize that I agree that the regulation would desire to be repealed and absolutely everyone wishing to serve who's able would desire to be allowed. in spite of the undeniable fact that, it is what it is for now.

It conveys the subtle message that if gays are not good enough for military service, then they're not 'good enough' to be accepted by the rest of society either. In short; it furthers misconceptions and give a blessing to stereotypes and discrimination :(

it saves me when the draft happens, when mccain is elected.