Whenever opponents of open gay service in the military are asked why they favor “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” (DADT) (or an outright ban on gays serving in the military), they respond that sexuality has no place in the military, and they couldn’t be more wrong. As long as there are humans serving in the military, sexuality will have a place there as well. Even a cursory glance at Maslow’s hierarchy of needs shows that sexuality plays a role in the human condition. It plays a role in every level of this pyramid, yet opponents of gay service ignore the role sexuality plays in all of our lives, starting with their own.
Last week’s blog posts have drawn a lot of attention from a lot of people. Many people came across of it from Rachel Maddow on Twitter, this post on AMERICAblog Gay and Andy Towle via this entry on his blog, Towleroad. The story was sent to Michelangelo Signorile and he asked me to appear on his show on Tuesday.
You can download or listen to a recording of the interview here (via Dropbox, right-click to download).
As I’ve been saying for the past several days, the response to my blog posts last week has been incredible. I am absolutely touched and inspired by all the positive comments I’ve received and continue to receive. I think at this point there are over 500 positive comments on the various pages, and you can see the wide range of people who have been touched by this story. I mentioned in a previous post that I wasn’t going to post negative comments. Surprisingly there have been few, and none worth your time even to read.
I’ll be on Sirius XM’s OutQ 108 today at 3:30 EST with Michelangelo Signorile, talking about my recent blog post about taking a date to the Marine Corps Birthday Ball for the first time following repeal of DADT.
I have spent most of my career being single. Anyone who has been in a relationship with a Marine knows it’s difficult. Long hours, short-notice trips, weeks in the field, months on deployment, weekends/holidays/birthdays missed–these affect all of us. DADT just added another complex layer to an already difficult endeavor. For someone to be in a relationship with me, he would be to required accept the fact that I was going to lie about who he was if I mentioned him at all. When asked by commanders and coworkers if I was married, I’d say no even if we lived together. It is the epitome of a double life: on the one hand there is a special person who makes the unique challenges of your life remotely bearable, while at the same time you’re denying to anyone interested that he even exists. If you do let down long enough to go out in public together, your head is on a swivel, always looking out for anyone who may see you doing something that could get you in trouble. Even going to the gym could be a challenge–you want to spend the time together as a couple, but if there are Marines at the same gym, you’re just “workout buddies” and it becomes even worse: he has to stand there while you deny your relationship in front of his face. How many times can you do that before you just give up trying? I have no idea what that must have felt like for the men I dated. I do know that it killed a piece of me every time I had to do it.
We got a cab to the Manchester Grand Hyatt in San Diego and walked to the entrance. Standing there and looking around to see Marines throughout the lobby, we both thought, “What the hell are we doing here?” We looked at each other, took a deep breath, and stepped inside. We were careful from the very beginning not to be too close to each other. At one point, while the one of us who passed land navigation as a lieutenant in Quantico, VA managed to get lost on the way to the bathroom, our hands bumped and we quickly pulled them back. We made our way to the bar because the glass of wine and cocktail we had while getting ready weren’t taking the edge off as effectively as we’d hoped. A Marine I knew from work walked up and introduced his wife.
There is an enormous pressure–perhaps self-induced, I admit–to prove that I can do my job as well as (if not better than) anyone else. I had always placed this pressure on myself, as all of my gay military friends had, because I felt I had something to prove, even if no one else knew I was doing it. For my entire career I lived with the idea that people–from conservative civilian lobbyists to my fellow Marines to my Commander in Chief–believed I was incapable of succeeding as a Marine because I was gay. They thought we had no place in the military, and therefore it was up to us to be beyond reproach and the very best in our fields. In many ways that pressure has since been compounded, because it’s no longer a secret struggle.
The world is watching as we expose our true selves. Those who opposed repeal are scrutinizing every one of us, waiting for the opportunity to say that repeal was a mistake. As an officer and a leader of Marines, I lead from the front, setting the example for junior Marines and officers and to prove that there is no need to describe my service as that of a gay Marine, but just a Marine. Because of this, every word I say, every order I issue, every email I write, and every look I give is a conscious effort, as carefully thought out and worded as the letters, essays, and interviews I gave prior to repeal. Each and every moment of my life holds in it the possibility of discredit and disservice to my Corps. I cannot fail the Marines who are counting on me to pave the way forward as a Marine in a post-DADT military.
Last year, around this time actually, the Commandant of the Marine Corps, General James Amos, came to the Marine Corps Recruit Depot in San Diego where I was working as a Series Commander for recruit training. I was in the middle of my second cycle in that position, and I was eager to hear what our Commandant had to say about the status of our Corps, from operations in Iraq and Afghanistan to personnel issues, particularly the policy known as “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” I had been following the news on DADT closely for a year, for what are now obvious reasons. Gen Amos had recently testified before Congress that the existing policy was working fine and he was not inclined to repeal the existing policy while Marines were engaged in combat operations on two fronts. The results of the Comprehensive Review Working Group had been compiled and released, and the Marines were clearly the most resistant to changing the 18 year-old policy.
Leading up to the repeal of DADT on 20 September, I was asked by some members of the press to comment. I did so anonymously, and explicitly stated that my views were my own and were in no way meant to be construed as representative of the Marine Corps. The reporters were fixated on the idea that I didn’t want to come out in the interviews, sometimes to the point of what seemed like misrepresenting what I was saying. I told one of them, “It’s not that I don’t want people to find out I’m gay, it’s that I don’t want them to find out from reading a newspaper or watching the news.” One day discovering the sexuality of a Marine will happen naturally as you ask him if he’s dating anyone and he tells you the person’s name. We aren’t there yet, but we will get there.
As for “coming out” at work, I don’t think I should have to sit people down and tell them I’m gay. But I’m done watching what I say, I’m done being intentionally vague. People need to know that there are gay people in the military who are serving honorably. I don’t need banners and media attention, I just need to be myself and people will come to understand and accept it at their own pace. I am not a second-class citizen, and I won’t let anyone treat me as one anymore. I certainly won’t do it to myself. I deserve better than that. Continue reading “Thoughts on the end of DADT”
Last week, Newt Gingrich was interviewed on the Christian Broadcasting Network after announcing his forming of a committee to consider a presidential run in 2012. In it, he made the following comment:
In a sense, our Judeo-Christian civilization is under attack from two fronts. On one front, you have a secular, atheist, elitism. And on the other front, you have radical Islamists. And both groups would like to eliminate our civilization if they could. For different reasons, but with equal passion. (From an Interview on the Christian Broadcasting Network, 9 March 2011)
For a man doing an interview with CBN in an attempt to clarify his indiscretions, Newt Gingrich seems to be attacking Judeo-Christian values just fine on his own. That aside, he is intent on being forgiven for his inappropriate actions by Evangelical Christians whose support he would need in a successful bid for the presidency in 2012. I would venture to say that someone who would break his own sacred vows and then expect immediate forgiveness not only for his actions but for his soul is exactly the kind of person we don’t need running the country right now. Can a man be trusted who claims to follow a particular faith, and upon his failure expects all to be forgiven without understanding? If he can’t do it in his marriage, I struggle to see how he’d be able to do it with any less sacred a bond. I’d much prefer someone who has a demonstrated history of living by the rules he has sworn to uphold.
Yesterday, I happened across the same quote posted by a friend on Facebook. As the particular quote struck a nerve with me, I posted a comment on the quote, which resulted in a discussion. The discussion was between myself and another commenter, not my friend who made the original post. Here’s how it played out, and I’d love to hear your comments.