DADT Proponents Offer Up A Bowl Of Bigoted Goulash

First Posted: 04/04/10 06:12 AM ET Updated: 05/25/11 04:25 PM ET

Dadt

It's worth pointing out some recent statements by the irrational simps who linger on the deranged margins of the Don't Ask, Don't Tell debate.

Here, for example, is armchair warrior extraordinaire Michael O'Hanlon, dropping pure stone-age drivel on CNN:

"We can talk about this delicately or we can just be fairly direct," O'Hanlon said. "There are a lot of 18-year-old, old-fashioned, testosterone-laden men in the military who are tough guys. They're often politically old-fashioned or conservative; they are not necessarily at the vanguard, in many cases, of accepting alternative forms of lifestyle."

Of this, Glenn Greenwald has already weighed in with his distinctive brand of withering truth:

First of all, O'Hanlon sounds like he just stepped out of a 1981 Moral Majority documentary. Who still talks about sexual orientation being an "alternative form of lifestyle"? That was always a dishonest and propagandistic phrase -- as though gay people intrinsically lead a different "lifestyle" -- and it's rare these days to hear anyone outside of Jim Dobson and Maggie Gallagher use it. And the apparent belief of O'Hanlon that there's an inverse relationship between masculinity and acceptance of gay people ("testosterone-laden men who are tough guys") is ludicrous, though, almost certainly, his saying this unintentionally reveals some disturbing psychosexual undercurrents that are driving O'Hanlon himself.


Second, O'Hanlon's views on the repeal of DADT were the same ones cited to oppose racial integration and an expanding role for women in the military (it's not me, but those primitive enlisted men, who will cause problems). It's also unbelievably disrespectful of the military itself and its rank-and-file, since it assumes that those who join the military are consumed with such uncontrollable bigotry and are incapable of adhering to its policies and dictates. That, too, seems to say much more about O'Hanlon than the "rank-and-file" members of the military whom he's disparaging.

Greenwald's last point demands to be repeated. How on earth do people like O'Hanlon get away with justifying an indefensible practice, when they ground it in nothing but their disgustingly low opinion of our fighting men and women? And beyond that, presuming to speak for them, when, in fact, recent surveys of those same soldiers have revealed that "having a gay or lesbian colleague in their unit had no significant impact on their unit's cohesion or readiness."

I suppose that I should give Bill Kristol some credit, for merely holding a low opinion on gay people:

Advocates of repeal will say sexual orientation is irrelevant to military performance in a way these attributes are not. But this is not clearly true given the peculiar characteristics of military service.

For just a taste of some common sense, here's Andrew Sullivan:

I wonder, for example, if he believes that Israel, whose security is much more potentially vulnerable than our own, is weaker because it doesn't bar perfectly good soldiers because they violate ancient Leviticus strictures.

But look: Here's some real talk that you can take to the bank, right now. Kristol has the same innate knowledge of the "peculiar characteristics of military service" as he does about the route of the San Francisco Pride parade, which is to say, the null set.

Let me tell you something about the peculiar characteristics of the gays and lesbians who join the military. Despite the bigotry of self-appointed military experts, despite the cowardice of elected officials and despite the fact that revealing their very identity could end their careers, they nevertheless sign up in large numbers to defend this nation.

"Don't Ask Don't Tell" needs to be repealed. And at some point, perhaps in the very near future, it's going to be repealed. And that's going to be the end of that.

RELATED:
Michael O'Hanlon's "testosterone-laden tough guys" [Glenn Greenwald]
Kristol Rallies The Christianists [Andrew Sullivan]

[Would you like to follow me on Twitter? Because why not? Also, please send tips to tv@huffingtonpost.com -- learn more about our media monitoring project here.]

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Hill newsletter!
It's worth pointing out some recent statements by the irrational simps who linger on the deranged margins of the Don't Ask, Don't Tell debate. Here, for example, is armchair warrior extraordinaire M...
It's worth pointing out some recent statements by the irrational simps who linger on the deranged margins of the Don't Ask, Don't Tell debate. Here, for example, is armchair warrior extraordinaire M...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 9
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Recency  | 
Popularity
02:34 PM on 02/03/2010
Myself being a lesbian, feels the repeal of DADT may be quite a problem. All my life I have encountered slurs, slanders, negative attitudes, and threats, because of my "LIFE STYLE". Yes, there are many other "STRAIGHTS" that feel obligated to make these menacing and harrassing comments. The so called "COMMON PUBLIC" has no idea what we must endure because of ALL the uneducated, insecure, NOSEY, biased slurs and actions!! Remember the old saying: Don't judge until you have walked in the other person's shoes?
As I perceive and suspect (which I'm 98% of the time correct) the gays in the military will still be chastised, harrassed, and put into positions where their lives will be more threatened!! Put on the front lines?? No one to "COVER THEIR BACKS"? More rapes, more turmoil, and more loss of lives and GOOD people, because of ignorance, lack of tolerance, insecurities, uneducated, good old boy beliefs, Homophobes,and downright social unacceptance of the gay lifestyle. AS JSHADE PUT IT---If people truly knew human history there would be no need for a military.
Who should be concerned about Gays in the Military in the 1st place.The military is there for protection, and to serve us "WE THE PEOPLE" !! What difference should any ones beliefs, lifestyle, religion, ethnicity, play a part in their service to OUR COUNTRY?!!!
photo
OldTart
Let it begin with me...
05:22 PM on 02/02/2010
My opinion? Religious beliefs, sexual orientation and practices, political views - none of these belong in the public domain. Don't ask and don't tell about any of them! Public is public, private is private. Let people act in good faith in their public obligations and view them on that performance alone.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
Cambridge9
11:46 AM on 02/03/2010
If you are a Brit I will answer as another Old Tart (very British).

I agree. There are hundreds - in fact thousands/millions of people who perform wonderfully without creating problems with their own personal views. However, NONE of them should have to live a lie. Example, if I want to help out at a Church benefit, or act as a mentor at a religious organization's sport's event, should i be turned away, and my abilities refused - because I admit that I'm agnostic??
04:38 PM on 02/02/2010
Did either Billie or Mikie ever serve in the military? I doubt it. The men in my family have all served and say there have always been gays in the military. It is ridiculous that many have been forced out for no good reason. Contrary to what Mikie said, I think most young people today do not have a problem with gays serving openly in the military or any other place, and it's the homophobs who cause the problems.
04:29 PM on 02/02/2010
Our military does nothing better than follow orders. When their leadership accepts and supports this change, the "enlisted" troops will fall in line and salute smartly. This is similar to integrating African Americans into the services. Were there some racists who didn't like that? Sure, still are, but they know they better shut up or get out. It will be the same for integrating gays, except for the fact that many gays are already there.
06:35 PM on 02/02/2010
I served honorably my entire Naval career. Most of the men in my family had been drafted. You are incorrect. African American men were DRAFTED into the military and then treated badly. This situation is 100% volunteer. In order to make it fair, those that want to leave because they signed under DADT policy should be allowed to leave with full benefits. Those that wish to stay should stay. Or we could do like Israel and make it mandatory that EVERYBODY serves in the military.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Naithom
Estne volumen in toga, an solum tibi libet me vide
03:39 PM on 02/02/2010
Did these people never read military history - Alexander the Great who invaded Syria, Egypt, Mesopotamia, Persia and India - was gay?
04:42 PM on 02/02/2010
If people truly knew human history there would be no need for a military.
06:36 PM on 02/02/2010
Good One!