The Man in the Box

By Jenna Burleigh

Possibly moments from death, a soldier sits in a fox hole with his comrades as bullets and shrapnel fly overhead. Bombs blasting in the background, the other men around him begin to pray, wishing to live one more day. Just one more day and they can see their wives and girlfriends again. But there is no woman on this soldier’s mind. All he can think of is the man he left at home: the man of his dreams. He thinks of those broad shoulders and that wily grin. Then the world ends.

What is it like to die, knowing you’ve lived a lie? Is there a sense of freedom, a release unattained in life? Or perhaps the box that has constrained one in life becomes the chains that imprison one in death, leaving loved ones clueless as to who the person in the box truly was.

Homosexuality is not uncommon in America, but it is not yet widely accepted. For soldiers and members of the armed forces, constraints of the ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ policy force them to conceal their sexual orientation, keep secret a part of their life, or face being discharged.

Keeping to his campaign promises, President Obama has voiced that he wants to do away with the DADT policy, promising that change will come, though not soon. In a recent speech at a dinner of the Human Rights Campaign, Obama said, “I will end ‘don’t ask, don’t tell,” according to an article in the Huffington Post.

“It was originally set up as a compromise under the Clinton administration,” says Kay Branagan, lecturer of gender and women’s studies and Africana studies at Plattsburgh State.

The policy allowed for homosexuals, who had previously been denied this right, to be able to serve in the armed forces. President Clinton, who signed the policy in 1993, hoped to deliver on his campaign promises to the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) community.

Since ’93, more than 12,500 people have been dismissed due to their orientation.

“The military tells you that you can serve, provided you don’t say anything about being gay,” says David McReynolds, a homosexual pacifist and former member of the War Resistor’s League. “If you declare your homosexuality, you’ll be thrown out.”

The DADT policy, though put in place with good intentions, still infringes upon the rights of American citizens. “We’ve recognized the sacrifices people are making to serve our country and to protect our freedoms, and we need everyone to be treated equally. That’s all it is: equal treatment,” says Patricia Bentley, gay rights activist and librarian at PSUC.

“These are the last great issues of civil rights in the United States. It’s time. Everyone is created equal,” Bentley says.

On Oct. 10, thousands of Americans rallied in Washington D.C., waving signs and banners in support of repealing the DADT policy. The LGBT community marched in efforts of getting Obama to keep his promises, and end discrimination against homosexuals in the military.

Branagan says she thinks this discrimination is a way to deny homosexuals the fundamentals of citizenship. “Serving in the military has always been a basic idea of ‘who is a citizen?’” Branagan says. “It’s defining who exactly is a citizen.”

“According to news reports, the pentagon formalized the idea of banning gays from the military… on the grounds that homosexuality is incompatible with military service,” says Harvey Schantz, political science professor at PSUC.

“In May of ’93, only 44 percent of [Americans] thought that openly gay people should be in the military,” Schantz says, compared to 75 percent in 2008. “At the time, it seemed like a radical change.”

As the years progressed, popular opinions changed, with increasing support for homosexuality to be accepted in the military. “What once seemed unacceptable now seems palatable,” Schantz says.

“Because of changing attitudes, it’s no longer a viable discriminatory practice. It needs to be abandoned,” Bentley says. “We need to celebrate all the people who are willing to serve and protect us.”

There are disagreements whether or not this policy serves any real purpose. “I think that it’s working because it has been in place for a number of years. But as societal opinions change, as morays change, it sometimes requires a look back at earlier views and decisions,” Schantz says. “The decisions and laws of one era may be outdated in a later era.”

Schantz says the policy was good in the sense that it allowed homosexuals into the military, but it left people wanting more. “The negative effect is that people of that group feel they are being denied the right to display exactly who they are and to exercise their rights to practice as they wish.”

McReynolds says he is absolutely opposed to the DADT policy. “It means [homosexuals] have to lead a partial and incomplete life by hiding.”

Branagan says the military should be able to dismiss homosexuals on the basis of their orientation “only if they want to dismiss heterosexuals on the basis of theirs.”

She and Bentley both say they think the DADT policy negatively affects the military because it requires skilled members of the armed forces to be dismissed for no other reason than their orientation.

“[DADT] continued the policies of the past and ended up with more people being removed because of that,” Branagan says.

“We need every gifted, bright, young person who is willing to serve us,” Bentley says.

As a pacifist, McReynolds says he is completely against all war. “War and nationalism are terrible things,” he says. However, he stands by an individual’s civil rights. “Anyone who wants to serve in [the military] should have the right to do so.”

He also says he believes the DADT policy is unjust. “Because you’re deviating from a social norm, you’re going to be punished for that,” he says, calling the policy a “violation of constitutional rights.”

For many in the armed forces, being obligated to live in a “box” may be more painful than being buried in one.

Sidebar:

Gay marriage is legal or recognized here: Connecticut, D.C. (not yet a law, but it currently recognizes marriages from other states), Massachusetts, Iowa, Maine, New Hampshire, and Vermont.

Civil unions are recognized here: New Hampshire, New Jersey,

State has no laws prohibiting same-sex marriage: New Mexico, New York, Rhode Island,

Gay marriage is banned or not recognized here: Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin, and Wyoming.

States passed law to allow gay marriage, then overturned this ruling, banning gay marriage: California