Suchergebnisse

AbstractThe 2010 Don't Ask Don't Tell Repeal Act, along with the 2016 DOD announcement regarding the impending inclusion of transgender soldiers, created the possibility of open and unsanctioned military service for LGBTQs for the first time in US history. This article provides an overview of how these policy changes came about, from the emergence of DADT to the legal and activist challenges to its legitimacy, including its ultimate repeal and the subsequent move to extend open service to transgender people. After summarizing what we know so far about how the repeal has (and has not) changed the experience of service for LGBTQs, I consider how these policy changes have been received and interpreted by LGBTQ activists and scholars. Open military service is either viewed as one of the most exciting or the most damning developments of LGBTQ organizing in the 21st century, according to the two most prominent activist perspectives. This review outlines the key arguments of each perspective and concludes by considering the value of reconciling these disparate vantage points when analyzing the future of LGBTQ social movement strategy.

The repeal of DADT represents the triumph of non-discrimination rhetoric, while the MLDC's report stands for a renewed effort to expand the military's affirmative action policies for the benefit of people of color and women: two historically subordinated groups in the U.S. military. The repeal of DADT may have purchased equality for LGB service members, but at a premium. The strategic decision to rally around the non-discrimination model, I argue in this Article, will reinforce the continued subordination of LGB service members. As an alternative, I propose the application of kakou principles to military policies and programs for integrating LGB service members. Kākou, in the Hawaiian language, literally means "us" or "we."According to the study of clusivity in the field of linguistics, language and word choice can be deployed to communicate either exclusion or inclusion. More figuratively, kakou signifies collective action to address a social problem. Therefore, when one says, "it's a kakou thing" to describe an event, the speaker means that everyone is invited to participate. On a deeper level, "it's a kakou thing" also means that everyone's participation is required to make the event a success. If exclusion is a primary means of subordination, as I will argue in this Article, then the notion of inclusion as manifested in the value of kakou provides a new way of re-imagining anti-subordination justice work. In comparison to the dominant non-discrimination model promoted during the DADT repeal movement, kakou is concerned with substantive equality and requires an awareness of difference for the purpose of gaining collective strength based on individual differences. The history of the DADT repeal exposes the consequences of vocabulary and word choice in progressive social change advocacy. To achieve the goal of repeal, mainstream DADT repeal advocates successfully utilized the narrative of non-discrimination and formal equality--that is, gay soldiers are no different than straight soldiers, according to the rhetoric of the repeal movement, and therefore they should be treated similarly. But under the terms of the repeal, the military will not consider sexual orientation or the history of LGB subordination to be relevant factors in recruitment, retention, promotion, or other personnel decision making. In achieving the repeal under these terms, LGB service members have been deprived of access to and benefits from the military's equal opportunity (EO) and diversity programs. As a result of the strategic deployment of the non-discrimination narrative by repeal advocates, sexual orientation and gender identity has been completely eliminated from the military's discourse about diversity. Part I provides factual background by chronicling the U.S. military's history of unequal treatment of marginalized groups--namely, people of color, women, and LGBTQ people. Part II introduces a new conceptual framework for understanding the harms resulting from the military's historical subjugation of these groups. Borrowing from the field of linguistics, Part II uses the notion of clusivity to describe laws and policies banning or restricting certain groups from military service as exclusionary and, by contrast, describes redress efforts such as affirmative action as inclusive. More specifically, Part II proposes the use of the Native Hawaiian value of kakou as a way to reimagine anti-subordination scholarship and activism. Utilizing the kakou paradigm, Part III describes the military's efforts at remedying the subordination of marginalized groups. Part IV sets forth my proposal that the military should adopt, as it does in the context of affirmative action programs for people of color and women, kakou-imbued programs to repair the historical subordination of LGB service members.

The repeal of DADT represents the triumph of non-discrimination rhetoric, while the MLDC's report stands for a renewed effort to expand the military's affirmative action policies for the benefit of people of color and women: two historically subordinated groups in the U.S. military. The repeal of DADT may have purchased equality for LGB service members, but at a premium. The strategic decision to rally around the non-discrimination model, I argue in this Article, will reinforce the continued subordination of LGB service members. As an alternative, I propose the application of kakou principles to military policies and programs for integrating LGB service members. Kākou, in the Hawaiian language, literally means "us" or "we."According to the study of clusivity in the field of linguistics, language and word choice can be deployed to communicate either exclusion or inclusion. More figuratively, kakou signifies collective action to address a social problem. Therefore, when one says, "it's a kakou thing" to describe an event, the speaker means that everyone is invited to participate. On a deeper level, "it's a kakou thing" also means that everyone's participation is required to make the event a success. If exclusion is a primary means of subordination, as I will argue in this Article, then the notion of inclusion as manifested in the value of kakou provides a new way of re-imagining anti-subordination justice work. In comparison to the dominant non-discrimination model promoted during the DADT repeal movement, kakou is concerned with substantive equality and requires an awareness of difference for the purpose of gaining collective strength based on individual differences. The history of the DADT repeal exposes the consequences of vocabulary and word choice in progressive social change advocacy. To achieve the goal of repeal, mainstream DADT repeal advocates successfully utilized the narrative of non-discrimination and formal equality--that is, gay soldiers are no different than straight soldiers, according to the rhetoric of the repeal movement, and therefore they should be treated similarly. But under the terms of the repeal, the military will not consider sexual orientation or the history of LGB subordination to be relevant factors in recruitment, retention, promotion, or other personnel decision making. In achieving the repeal under these terms, LGB service members have been deprived of access to and benefits from the military's equal opportunity (EO) and diversity programs. As a result of the strategic deployment of the non-discrimination narrative by repeal advocates, sexual orientation and gender identity has been completely eliminated from the military's discourse about diversity. Part I provides factual background by chronicling the U.S. military's history of unequal treatment of marginalized groups--namely, people of color, women, and LGBTQ people. Part II introduces a new conceptual framework for understanding the harms resulting from the military's historical subjugation of these groups. Borrowing from the field of linguistics, Part II uses the notion of clusivity to describe laws and policies banning or restricting certain groups from military service as exclusionary and, by contrast, describes redress efforts such as affirmative action as inclusive. More specifically, Part II proposes the use of the Native Hawaiian value of kakou as a way to reimagine anti-subordination scholarship and activism. Utilizing the kakou paradigm, Part III describes the military's efforts at remedying the subordination of marginalized groups. Part IV sets forth my proposal that the military should adopt, as it does in the context of affirmative action programs for people of color and women, kakou-imbued programs to repair the historical subordination of LGB service members.

The Department of Defense policy Don't Ask, Don't Tell (DADT) ended in September, 2011. The Navy Bloodborne Infection Management Center conducted a post-DADT pilot survey of HIV seroconverters identified when the DADT policy was in effect. Sailors and Marines newly diagnosed as HIV positive from 2005 to 2010 were invited to participate in an online survey. A structured questionnaire elicited risk information about the 3-year period before HIV diagnosis. Respondents reported engaging commonly in same sex sexual activity, having concurrent partners, and poor condom use for anal sex. In this first post-DADT repeal report of self-reported behaviors, male-to-male sexual contact was a much more common mode of infection than previously reported. Several opportunities for primary prevention messaging now possible after DADT repeal are evident.

The U.S. military's "don't ask, don't tell" (DADT) policy has been controversial since its adoption in 1993. The policy has been criticized as discriminatory for tolerating or fostering homophobic attitudes and behavior, and as detrimental to military effectiveness. This article examines the results of recent votes in the U.S. Congress to repeal DADT to identify factors that may predict members' votes on morality issues, such as DADT. Our results demonstrate that the members' political ideology and the political party preference of the members' home district or state are strong predictors of how the members voted on repeal of DADT. For members of the House of Representatives, freshmen members were more likely than their colleagues to vote in ways that coincided with the political preferences of their home district.La política militar "don't ask, don't tell" (DADT) del ejército de los Estados Unidos ha sido controversial desde su adopción en 1993. Esta medida ha sido calificada como discriminatoria, por tolerar o promover actitudes y conductas homofóbicas, y como perjudicial para la efectividad militar. Este artículo examina los resultados de votos recientes en el Congreso de los Estados Unidos para eliminar DADT con el fin de identificar los factores que pueden predecir el voto de los miembros en cuestiones morales como DADT. Nuestros resultados demuestran que la ideología política de los miembros y la afiliación política de los distritos locales o estatales de cada miembro son fuertes indicadores del voto realizado en el Congreso respecto a la eliminación de DADT. Para la Cámara de Representantes, los miembros recién electos mostraron una mayor probabilidad que sus colegas más antiguos en votar de forma tal que coincidiese con las preferencias políticas de su distrito local.

Though many believe some of the greatest military leaders of all time - from Alexander the Great to Julius Caesar - have engaged in sex acts with other males, and though certainly a very different political climate from that of ancient Greece or Rome, the United States military has historically never accepted homosexual sex acts within its own military, nor has the United States military accepted open homosexuals either until recently. This thesis focuses on the evolution of United States military policy towards homosexuals and the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" (DADT) policy of the United States military in order to recommend a path that the United States can follow to provide an equal opportunity for success of openly homosexual service members. This research traces the history of policy towards homosexuality in the United States military up through the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy and its repeal. This research discusses changing governmental policies towards homosexuals in the military, as well as changing public opinions about "Don't Ask, Don't Tell". This research also outlines discharges under the policy, connecting changing public opinion to the policy's eventual repeal. Through the analysis of statistics surrounding discharges, opinion surveys, and anecdotal evidence, this research evaluates the level of acceptance for openly homosexual service members in a post-DADT world. These findings will then be compared with the adjustment of troops in Great Britain and Canada, who each have experienced relative success in the integration of homosexual troops, in order to make a recommendation for a course of action that the United States could take in order to help better the adjustment of soldiers to a non-exclusionary policy. ; 2013-08-01 ; B.A. ; Sciences, Dept. of Political Science ; Bachelors ; This record was generated from author submitted information.

Abstract
The 2010 repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell (DADT) is one example of how U.S. public policy has shifted toward greater inclusion of lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) individuals. The repeal of DADT reversed the practice of discharging LGB service members on the basis of sexual identity. LGB service members may now serve their country without fear of direct repercussions stemming from sexual identity. Though it is a statutory step toward parity, DADT repeal does not address a number of cultural and institutional inequities that continue to hinder full inclusion of sexual minority service members. Notably, as discussed in this article, DADT largely ignores issues facing the transgender population. This study examines remaining inequities and their ramifications for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender service members and their families. The article concludes with practice and policy recommendations for culturally competent social work practice with military service members across the sexual identity spectrum.

This research brief considers the historic impact of the US military's "Don't Ask/Don't Tell" (DADT) policy on women and racial/ethnic minorities. Enacted by the US Congress in 1993, Don't Ask/Don't Tell prohibits lesbian, gay, or bisexual men and women from disclosing their sexual orientation while they serve in the US military. Since 1993, more than 13,000 individuals have been discharged for violating the DADT policy. Data presented in this brief show that the proportion of women and racial/ethnic minorities among those discharges has increased over time. In the late 1990s approximately a quarter of discharges were women and similar proportions were racial/ethnic minorities. In recent years, those proportions have increased to more than a third of the DADT discharges.

U.S. military policy "Don't Ask Don't Tell" (DADT) restricted integration of gays in the U.S. military based on the premise that knowledge of gay peers would decrease interpersonal bonds among unit members. Despite the heated debate over DADT, this social cohesion thesis, reflecting the tensions of homosocial desire, has not been tested empirically. The Israeli military provides an operative case‐study for this thesis, given its nonexclusionary policy and intensive combat experience. Measures of perceived social cohesion and knowledge of gay peers were obtained from a sample of 417 combat and noncombat male soldiers using an inventory of interpersonal emotions towards unit members. A MANOVA of social cohesion by knowledge of gay peers and combat/noncombat unit yielded the hypothesized increase in cohesion in combat versus noncombat units. Yet contrary to the DADT premise, knowledge of gay peers did not yield decreased social cohesion. Comparisons with the U.S. military are presented, suggesting in both cases a loose coupling between stated policies and soldiers' experience on the ground. Implications of these findings for the reassessment of DADT and its repeal are discussed.

At the request of the Senate Armed Services Committee and the Secretary of Defense, the RAND Corporation conducted a study on sexual orientation and U.S. military policy in order to provide information and analysis that might be considered in discussing the possible repeal of the law known as "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" (DADT). The study examined DADT implementation; U.S. public and military opinion about allowing gay men and lesbians to serve in the military without restriction; and the scientific literature on group cohesion, sexual orientation, and related health issues. RAND conducted focus groups with military personnel and a survey of gay, lesbian, and bisexual military personnel. RAND researchers also examined the comparable experiences of other institutions, domestic agencies, and foreign militaries, as well as how repeal of DADT might affect unit cohesion and military readiness and effectiveness

Using auto-ethnographic methods coupled with social media analysis of a secret Facebook group that contains personal accounts of active military junior officers, this work brings in conversation this data with theory that currently comprises the framework of queer migration. Much has been written on the movement to strike down the DADT policy; not much thought has been given to the aftermath post its abolishment. Although the repeal of DADT was a relief for many queer servicemembers, several still live as if DADT was law, due in large part to the management of their career of coming out as a result of where they may or may not be spatially located physically and within the ranks. This work examines how queer U.S. servicemembers' lives are impacted by mobility coupled with lack of choice.