CommunityPam's House Blend

Pentagon mulling segregation as an option based on DADT survey results

UPDATE: I’m bumping this back up; see below.

I can’t even begin to contemplate what kind of boobs there must be in the Pentagon to even go here — establishing segregation in our military as a solution for the homophobes in the ranks. Whatever happened to “following orders?” These bigots in the Pentagon really are as obsessive about sex/violence as Elaine Donnelly.

[Pentagon spokesman Geoff] Morrell also insisted that the questions with which most critics took the most umbrage — i.e., those related to lifestyle issues like socializing outside of work as well as showering and sharing barracks with openly gay and lesbian colleagues (as though that does not currently occur) — were developed as part of a process within the department and the working group to address the “privacy” issues of concern to heterosexual members of the military. Morrell said, “We think it would be irresponsible to conduct a survey that did not address these questions,” but insisted they were asked to help the military determine what adjustments might be necessary “when DADT is repealed.”

In response to questions from reporters, Morrell clarified that the survey responses could lead the military to conclude that it would “perhaps need adjustments to facilities themselves,” indicating that it is not outside the realm of possibility that, in order to preserve the privacy and modesty of heterosexual service members in group showers and barracks, the military would consider segregating gay and lesbian service members in some way.

What does our fierce advocate have to say about segregation even being floated as an option by Morrell?

UPDATE: John @ Americablog picked up this story about Morrell’s absurd statement and runs with it, in the context of hearing from friends who are still asking him why many LGBTs are pissed off at this President:

They’re talking about the possibility of segregation, people. Of instituting a policy of separate-but-equal in the year 2010, under a Democratic president.

It’s what they did to Barack Obama’s father. Does no one in the White House get the irony here? And does no one understand the political danger here? Does Jim Messina really want to see people showing up at Obama 2012 campaign rallies with the word “Colored” written in ink on their foreheads? With signs saying “Barack, would you segregate your own father?” and “George Wallace Obama”? Or how about simply a crowd of protesters at every event – and every fundraiser the President does for congressional races – wearing signs saying “I am a man”?

If one of his own administration spokesmen says segregation is an option, and President Obama doesn’t shut that conversation down immediately, and fire the bigot who had the audacity to even suggest such a thing – and he clearly hasn’t, as this segregation talking point keeps coming out of this Obama administration – then President Obama is to blame.

Actually, the metaphor of the lunch counters and fountains is not quite the way I see it, though by raising it in this context shows how clueless about how bigoted the statement was. Morrell and the Pentagon, and by extension the President, have said nothing about Morrell’s statement to date. The silence is deafening.

For me, the prospect of DADT repeal and even thinking about segregating lesbian and gay service members is so absurd, never mind bigoted that Morrell and anyone in the Pentagon considering it should be fired for stupidity.

What about bisexuals? How exactly will that be handled, Generals? Do they get to pick which tent in the war zone to bunk in?

Morrell and Co. have it all wrong – those who don’t want to be in contact with the homos need to be segregated out. That’s less costly, and we’ll know what tent to go to when there are gay-bashings. The fact is that the survey will show that many serving already know someone gay in their ranks, which means they’ve already been showering, bunking and otherwise living around TEH GAY and life goes on. What is the point of coddling the bigots? Religious objection to serving with someone who is gay or lesbian is ludicrous – no one is asking them to have sexual relations with them. It’s to do a job serving our country.

Previous post

Late Late Night FDL: I'm Not Running Anymore

Next post

Closing The gAyTM Is About What We Won't Do; So What Do We Do To Create LGBT Civil Rights Tension?

Pam Spaulding

Pam Spaulding