Frontlines: The Latest from OutServe-SLDN

Successful Open Service Requires Leadership

Allowing open gays in the services will lead to mass resignations, a downturn in recruitment and damage to readiness by destroying unit cohesion. Sound familiar? These were the predictions of disaster by senior members of the military and conservative members of Parliament when the United Kingdom was forced by the European Court to permit open service in 2000. So what happened?

I traveled to London last week at the invitation of the Royal Navy to observe the 5th annual Joint Service Conference on LGBT’s in the Military to find out how things were going. The conference title was “Out and in: Recruiting LGBT personnel in the Armed Services.” To my surprise, I was not the only American observer but was joined by a representative of the Pentagon who was on orders to attend. There were 120 participants in the two-day conference representing all three services (the Royal Marines are part of the Navy). This year the conference was organized by the Navy, so the program reflected the sea services.

Among the many speakers was the Director General Human Resources from the Ministry of Defense, the Service Complaints Commissioner for the Armed Forces and the Second Sea Lord, Vice Admiral Sir Alan Massey.

When not one word was mentioned about resignations by any of these distinguished speakers, I decided to ask around. Not surprisingly, I found out there were no resignations. January 10, 2000, the day the ban was lifted, was called “a non event.”

No discernable impact on retention. The same is true today, nine years later.

What about recruitment? A whole hour was dedicated to discuss the efforts to recruit personnel, especially LGBT young people. Recruiting booths are set up at Pride events. The British military is the largest single employer of LGBT people in the UK (a fact confirmed by the man from the Pentagon). All three services now march in the London Pride Parade in uniform!

Other then meeting the out and proud young professionals who attended the conference, the responses to questions from these service members to VADM Massey were most inspiring. He is the number two officer in the Navy and in charge of Personnel. First, he admitted excluding LGBT citizens from the service had been wrong. He apologized and went on to say, “It is immoral for us not to be representative of the society we are defending.” He continued to say such a discriminatory policy is unsustainable. I think my friend from the Pentagon heard this loud and clear.

And the impact on unit cohesion? Nothing negative. Many of those I met were out on the job and reported no limitation on assignments or promotion. Their units paid for them to attend the conference. They were all fully accepted by their peers and command. Although a few admitted experiencing some bantering, something we would call horse play, they understood that their “mates would only banter with us if they liked us.” There was also a clear procedure in place to report bullying, to us harassment, both up the chain of command and through a parallel civilian structure. It was reported that thus far in 2009 there have been 270 complaints through the civilian structure and only three involved issues around sexual orientation.

Many people I spoke to had served with Americans in both Iraq and Afghanistan. Our soldiers and Marines knew these individuals were gay and had no problem fighting alongside them and even accepting some of them into American units.

It is clear from my discussions with these British service members that this change did not occur in a vacuum. The officials of the government, and particularly the senior officers and noncommissioned officers, exerted leadership to make open service a success.

Our President has stated over and over that he wants DADT repealed, and the Congress is moving to meet the President’s stated position by enacting legislation. All we need is a demonstration of leadership from across the Potomac. If our British cousins are up to the task, shouldn’t we be?

By Capt Tom Carpenter, USMC (1970-1976), SLDN Board Member |

10 Comments

Comments for this entry are closed.

Michael @ LeonardMatlovich.com on December 15, 2009 at 07.58 am

The article at the link below about the differences for UK forces is even more illustrative than Tom’s report and has to be read to be believed but one picture…the OUT gay Trooper ON HIS PINK ZAC EFRON quilt IN THE MIDDLE OF AFGHANISTAN SURROUNDED BY HIS UK FORCES MATES ....says it all:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1234993/Gay-trooper-says-coming-best-decision.html

Michael Magee in San Diego on December 14, 2009 at 07.49 pm

Tom…This is a wonderful report on the British experience. It is clear that for all of the fear mongering that went on prior to the British repealing their own ban was for nothing.

Great work….M

Dino in Washington, DC on December 14, 2009 at 02.35 pm

Correction, this Aussie was attached to the AUSTRALIAN Embassy in Washington, DC.

Dino in Washington, DC on December 14, 2009 at 02.32 pm

Great article.  Another nation that dispensed with a ban against gay and lesbian servicemembers that is close to the US is Australia.  That country lifted its anti-gay military policy in November 1992, by a special order from Prime-Minister Paul Keating. Ironically and somewhat amusingly, Prime Minster Keating did so because he expected it to be done in the US shortly, as then President-Elect Bill Clinton had pledged to do so.  The Prime Minster was opposed by veteran organizations, conservative members of the Australian Parlament, senior military brass and even his own defense minister. They also used the same stale arguments to keep the ban in place; unit cohesion will suffer, servicemembers will resign, morale will deteroriate.. blah, blah, blah.  Australia is a partner of the US in Afghanistan, Iraq and elsewhere.  I met an openly gay Australian Servicemember attached to the US Embassy in WDC, who said he had served alongside his US Military counterparts in Japan in the late 1990s, and it was common knowledge that he was gay and it was (big surprise) a non-issue.

Keith Kerr in California  on December 11, 2009 at 05.06 pm

Tom,

An outstanding blog. Why the U. S. continues to insist on Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell is destructive to our military readiness. Thanks for attending this conference.

Keith

RADM Alan M. Steinman, USPHS/USCG (Ret) in DuPont, WA on December 11, 2009 at 03.58 pm

Tom,  your comments on this conference would make an excellent entry in the Military.com discussion boards.  The paragraph about known UK gay soldiers/Marines serving alongside US troops without incident would be particularly useful.

Michael @ LeonardMatlovich.com on December 11, 2009 at 12.52 pm

Correction: should read “ROBERT’s bigoted nonsense,” of course.

Michael @ LeonardMatlovich.com on December 11, 2009 at 12.49 pm

BRAVO, Rich!!!

You nailed Rich’s bigoted nonsense to the wall! The curious thing is why he wandered into our neighborhood, as it were, at all.

Finally, as we’re in the season when the inability of gay servicmembers to be open, let alone manifest themselves in all the ways allowed nongay servicemembers you catalogued, is surely more acutely painful as they are “home for Christmas [or Hanukkah] only in [their] dreams,” let’s make our collective New Year’s Resolution even stronger that the same will not be true by this time next year!

Rich on December 11, 2009 at 12.14 pm

@ Robert:  Good points.  Why is it necessary that heterosexual military members get additional pay and benefits because they have a spouse?  Why is it necessary for me to see a heterosexual servicemember bring their spouse or girl/boyfriend to the annual birthday ball/holiday dinner?  Why is it necessary for commands to honor the spouses of heterosexual servicemembers in open military ceremonies for promotions, awards, retirements, changes of commands, etc.?  Why don’t all the heterosexual servicemembers keep their private lives to themselves?  Why do we need to know?  No more framed pictures of spouses on desks, no more spouses clubs during deployments, no more certificates of appreciation handed out to spouses, no more spouses holding up the line at the Commissary/Exchange, or any other acknowledgment that these heterosexual relationships exist.  Why do I need to know all about your sexual preference that is broadcast throughout my military experience each and every day?

robert michaels on December 11, 2009 at 11.03 am

Why is it necessary for me to know the sexual preference of any individual?
Are there special requirements like with certain religions? Does a hetrosexual have to go around advertising one’s sexuality? Really .... there are more important things to deal with. Remember the very same people that you think are sympatatic to you are the very same who are using you to achieve there leftist aggenda.  Don’t ask don’t tell is a given.
Sexual preference is your thing and I don’t want or need to know about it.