Subject: GS!> SUBMISSION: Military Treatment of Gays, Blacks Similar
From: [email-masked]
Date: Wed, 4 Dec 1996 20:28:00 -0500

]==================================[
            GayScribe 
]==================================[

Welcome again to GayScribe -- featuring the journalism of Gip Plaster. Visit
GayScribe REDESIGNED page on the Web at http://members.aol.com/gayscribe.

Attached is an article for your periodical to consider for publication.

(If you are not a publication or wish to be removed from this list, please
see the "To Be Removed" section below.)

]==================================[
       About This Article 
]==================================[

MILITARY TREATMENT OF GAYS, BLACKS PARALLEL
It is no suprise to anyone that the military discriminates against gays and
lesbians. Recent events like the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" controversy and the
Col. Margarethe Cammermeyer case make that clear. But long before the public
heard about gay and lesbian discrimination, the military had to learn to
include African Americans. In this review of an essay in the new book Gay
Rights, Military Wrongs, I examine the striking parallels.

That piece is below; it is this week offering on GayScribe.

]==================================[
      If You Are Interested 
]==================================[

If your publication normally pays for articles and reviews, please contact
Gip Plaster, prior to publication at [email-masked] -- or within a week of
publication if you are on a tight deadline and prior notification is not
possible. If your publication does not pay, you may be able to publish the
piece at no cost. Please contact the author for details.

A brief bio is provided for publications that wish to use it: "Gip Plaster is
an independent writer for gay and lesbian publications around the country.
Reach him on-line at [email-masked]."

]==================================[
          To Be Removed 
]==================================[

IF YOU DO NOT WISH TO BE ON THIS LIST: This list was selected from lists of
people interested in quality gay and lesbian journalism. If you wish to be
removed from this list or if you would like future articles and reviews to go
to a different address, please write [email-masked], and your information
will be updated immediately.

THANKS FOR YOUR TIME AND COOPERATION. PLEASE OFFER YOUR FEEDBACK AT
[email-masked].

]==================================[
           The Article 
]==================================[

by Gip Plaster
GayScribe

Not many people were surprised when it became public that gays and lesbians
are not welcome in the military, but this community in not the first to be
excluded from service, and at least one author sees a parallel.

Long before gay and lesbian people were the target of the military's open
opposition, African Americans had to fight for their right to serve.

"The arguments used to keep African Americans segregated are so similar to
those that barred lesbians and gays in the early 1990s that a gay newspaper,
the Washington Blade, argued that the history of the military's exclusion of
African Americans 'seems to be serving as a blueprint for the military on how
to dissuade the government from allowing gays to serve openly in the ranks,'"
writes David Ari Bianco in an essay entitled "Echoes of Prejudice." It is one
of ten essays in the book Gay Rights, Military Wrongs, edited by Craig
Rimmerman (Garland Publishing).

Some scholars and African American activists are troubled by the parallel
Bianco points out between the two groups.

"Race is an immutable characteristic (such as skin color), while active
homosexuality concerns behavior," Robert H. Knight, the director of Cultural
Studies for the Family Research Council, said. "You cannot hide or change
your skin color, but you can choose to act or not on your inclinations."

While Bianco asserts that Knight and others who make similar arguments are
misinformed, Bianco said that in the long run, it doesn't really matter
anyway.

"The important question, however, is not whether race is similar to sexual
orientation, but whether racism is similar to homophobia," Bianco wrote. "In
the case of ... allowing African Americans and lesbians and gays to serve,
racism and homophobia have been strikingly similar."

Bianco lays out what he said are the sixteen major arguments used to exclude
gay and lesbian people from military service. He divides these sixteen into
four categories.

First, some of those opposed to homosexuals in the military maintain that
lesbians and gays are not fit to serve. Just as was the case when integration
of blacks into the military began, some don't want gays and lesbians in the
armed forces because they believe the excluded minority is made of criminals.
Some even suggest that gay men are likely to rape straight service members.

Disease is another part of the reason some think gays unfit to serve. They
believe gay male recruits will spread the AIDS virus. Similar arguments were
made against blacks in the military because of the sexually-transmitted
diseased they were believed to have. Succumbing to those fears, the Red Cross
maintained a segregated blood bank during World War II.

Others simply don't think homosexuals would perform as well as straights.
"People tend to look at homosexuals as being somewhat weak and nonaggressive
individuals," Colonel Jim Schwenk said.

Another colonel wrote that literature suggests "homosexuals generally need
support groups in order to function and that absent a supportive environment
most will fail."

Earlier this century, Bianco quotes one historian as saying that most senior
officials "took the position that black servicemen were difficult to train
and undependable in battle."

Some argue that gay and straight people cannot serve effectively together.
This could make it difficult to recruit and difficult to retain service
people, they suggest.

Bianco wrote, "The perceived danger of gays in the military to morale is so
great that [Vietnam veteran David] Hackworth put it starkly: 'I cannot think
of a better way to destroy fighting spirit and gut U.S. combat
effectiveness.'"

Other opponents say lifting the ban would impair the mission of the military,
and it is also argued that the rights of heterosexuals will be infringed if
gays and lesbians are not discriminated against.

"Do we not fight better, more courageously, more tenaciously, when we fight
with those we like? The gentleman may not like me," a congresswoman said,
referring to an African American colleague. "Should we have a law which will
force him to sleep in my bed, in my room with me, to eat with me, if he does
not like me nor my ways?"

Bianco noted, "These comments about soldiers sleeping together (along with
Senator Russell's citation of statistics showing African Americans as more
likely to carry syphilis and be convicted of sodomy) underscore the fact that
military racism and military homophobia are two sides of the same coin."

David Ari Bianco draws a number of convincing parallels between the exclusion
and eventually acceptance of African Americans in the military and the
exclusion and yet-to-be-determined resolution to the place of gays and
lesbians in the armed forces. Bianco said he hopes these parallels will give
pause to those who fight against inclusion of gays in the military and
provide to those who support inclusion some hope that the exclusion will be
overcome.

In any case, when African Americans began to gain a true place in American
society, the conservative structure of the military eventually allowed them
full privileges of service. Perhaps the military's exclusion of lesbians and
gays in just one more example of how far this community must still come.

]==================================[
  The GayScribe Page:
  http://members.aol.com/gayscribe 
]==================================[

END