Don't Ask, Don't Tell

[Xenophon]

There are a lot of good points in that essay. I had no idea it was going to be such a legal mess to repeal.

That being said, heres hoping it's a mess that gets cleaned up sooner rather than later.

[Old Eagle]

I was happy to see the SECDEF plan a review of all the issues. As MAJ Bloom points out, they are numerous. The last thing we need right now is a knee jerk reaction for political benefit, only to be reminded that the proverbial devil is in the details -- Guantanamo Closure Redux.

[marct]

LOL

The Devil is always in the details ! Honestly, when Canada shifted on the same-sex marriage issue, I was amazed at how fast all of the bureaucratic organizations moved. I don't know if the US is the same, but here at least, when parliament passes legislation, they can add a rider that changes all pre-existing laws to bring them in line with "new" definitions.

Now, we are just awaiting the first, truly high profile same-sex divorce.

[Schmedlap]

If nothing else, I hope that this incident exposes the majority of academia for the gang of dishonest, partisan clowns that they are. Boycotting military recruiters and ROTC were nothing but stunts to justify their anti-military bigotry under a guise of protesting discrimination of homosexuals. As is perfectly clear now, it is not the DoD who is responsible for "discrimination." It is the Congress of the United States. I doubt that colleges will discourage their students from internships or careers on Capitol Hill in the way that they currently hold their noses and strain to tolerate ROTC, enlisted recruiters, and JAG recruiters.

[selil]

If nothing else, I hope that this incident exposes the majority of academia for the gang of dishonest, partisan clowns that they are. Boycotting military recruiters and ROTC were nothing but stunts to justify their anti-military bigotry under a guise of protesting discrimination of homosexuals. As is perfectly clear now, it is not the DoD who is responsible for "discrimination." It is the Congress of the United States. I doubt that colleges will discourage their students from internships or careers on Capitol Hill in the way that they currently hold their noses and strain to tolerate ROTC, enlisted recruiters, and JAG recruiters.

You throw a lot of people under the bus pretty darn quick. ROTC is coming to our campus. The university in the midst of bone carving cuts is building them a headquarters. The main campus has a huge ROTC and senior officer program. We hold a veterans convocation twice a year. Our boots to books program is one of the best in the country. The efforts of the senior faculty (hi!) and the administration has turned a campus from anti-military ten years ago into a haven of acceptance and understanding. Oh, and we do have a rampant GLBT population that has supported these moves long before any recent changes or discussions.

[Schmedlap]

Selil,

If you want to quibble over "majority" then fine. But recent changes made in a political environment where servicemembers are the latest victim group above criticism is hardly evidence that anti-military bigotry has significantly receded in academia or even in student bodies. Much of what passes for "supporting our troops" in recent years has been little more than an indirect partisan swipe intended to cast servicemembers as helpless pawns in Bush's evil war for oil.

There are still universities who only allow recruitment, on-campus interviews, ROTC, and other activities due to the threat of having federal funds withdrawn. DoD doesn't make law. Congress does. But the blame is thrown at DoD. Now why would that be? I'm thinking along the lines of these comments and these instances.

[yamiyugikun]

I assumed there is anti-military bias on campuses because the radical protestors from the 1960s become college professors, influenced students to be liberal, and their current anti-military bias is leftover from the Vietnam War. Schmelap, I looked at how ROTC is descriminated against at the University of California (UCs), but what is more surprising from my internship at University Archives, is that during World War II, the University of California and Defense Department were closely allied in the War Training Program that allowed military/defense industry classes to be taught at universities in order to help the war effort. And believe it or not, Adm. Chester Nimitz started Navy ROTC at the UCs, was a faculty professor of naval science at UC Berkeley and there was even a Nimitz day holding celebrating the admiral's achievements. Adm. Nimitz and the governor of California appeared together at several UC football games too.

The UCs also helped develop nuclear research which was integral to military research, and the UCs still run the Los Alamos nuclear labs. So for all the complaining going on at the UCs, there's a proud history of helping the military. I find it ironic that in academia people pride themselves on being educated, knowing history, but conveniently forget in the present the historic connection between academia and military. Thoughts?

[Ken White]

Add that you're an astute young lady and your perception of what caused the current disconnect is IMO very accurately addressed in your first paragraph...

It wasn't always this way and it doesn't need to be but it will almost certainly remain as is until the Baby Boomers retire from their tenured positions and / or a major war erupts. There is a slight natural tension between between the academy and the armed forces, it ebbs and flows with societal changes and it is relatively cyclical. The current state of tension is nothing to worry about, all things considered. As Selil showed, it isn't a universal thing and it's really just a minor annoyance -- with the only real side effect being adverse to the academy (and the presumed goals of many of those tenured souls ), not the military -- where it does exist.