Dear Bill Clinton,
I never had a doubt you would write back to me, but what a thrill it was to receive your letter. It turned up in a pile of accumulated mail at my permanent address, somewhere between Christmas catalogs and a card from my Auntie Verna in Mesa, Ariz. Wow, Bill Clinton, you sure have nice stationery with bond paper like vanilla ice cream and a little gold presidential seal.
Since it appears you answer “open letters” printed in the Minnesota Daily, I am taking this opportunity to suggest another sensible and effective tweak to public policy. Yes, you already know I want more promotion of your Bill Emerson Good Samaritan Food Donations Act of 1996. Today I want to suggest a modification of the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy regarding gays in the military.
Everybody knows that policy ” the result of a congressional compromise with your administration ” was a failure. It has resulted in more gays being discharged from the military, not less. And who suffered for this policy? I mean, besides the gay service members themselves?
I suffered. And so did other members of my unit. You see, I was a military psychiatric technician, serving on a locked psych ward in Fort Bliss, Texas, right when your policy was implemented. Normally, we dealt with post-traumatic stress disorder, personality disorders, suicide attempts, substance abuse, maybe the occasional homicidal ideation or schizoid break with reality to keep life fun and interesting. But when your doomed policy came down the pike, suddenly my psych ward looked like West Hollywood. On the bright side, our arts and crafts therapy program really perked up. But such pouting about the chow! Really, does a cornbread crust make so much damn difference to a pizza?
There was a terrible irony in the fact that suspected or outed gay service members ended up in the army hospital for psychiatric evaluation. You see, the Army Medical Regiment is a notoriously tolerant place. The rest of a military base might be a seething cauldron of violent homophobia, yet within our large hospital complex, enlightenment was the order of the day. It was open, common knowledge that two of our nurses were more than just good friends. And there was a certain flamboyant clerk, highly competent, who appeared to be under the special protection of Alpha Company leadership. It was part of our medical ethic, after all, to promote healing rather than passing moral judgment.
Our hospital leaders set the tone, and the tone was one of quiet tolerance. Unlike the rest of the military, we concentrated on the “Don’t Ask” part as well as the “Don’t Tell.” We even knew about “Don’t Harass.” A lot of people forget all about the third component. Based on what I observed within the military’s medical environment, I would suggest a tweak to the present policy. I call it the “Fortresses of Enlightenment” proposal.
It works like this: Allow gay service members to serve openly in certain military occupational specialties like the medical professions and intelligence units. Getting into either of these specialties requires high scores on military vocational aptitude tests and, since there is a positive correlation between intelligence and tolerance, you can expect gay service people to be treated with respect within these units. Believe me, it’s already happening quietly.
Furthermore, we should stop ignoring the distinction between male and female homosexuals. What I’ve observed is that females in the military get tagged with the lesbian label for refusing sexual advances by males. It’s not the female soldiers who are denouncing other females as lesbians, it’s the males. In general, the most virulent homophobia in the military radiates from 18- and 19-year-old males who are still telling tall tales about high school prom night, not from female soldiers. Women already have it tough enough because of the impractical “no women in combat” rule. So I would suggest letting lesbians serve openly in all military specialties that are open to women. We should also apply historical lessons and therefore consider experimental “all women” and “all gay” combat units.
There could be some other small tweaks to my proposed policy. Maybe “rear echelon” administrative jobs on stateside military bases could fall under the policy. Maybe we could consider a 10-year experiment with the military’s culinary professions. There might be some truth to that cornbread crust thing. I’m willing to keep an open mind. My policy proposal is not based on logic or morality, but is a practical political compromise… just like Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. But my policy would succeed and build on the current policy because, in large part, it simply formalizes a situation that already exists informally: A. There are some pockets of tolerance within the military; B. Lesbians have never presented the same challenges to the military mindset as male homosexuals, and the lesbian label is used to keep women from advancing in a career field which is already stacked against women. C. Try something with a little pizzazz for brunch. You just might like it.
In any case, Mr. Clinton, I know you still have a lot of influence. Though the failure of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell is a blemish on the history of your administration, if you put forth a new suggestion for successful tweaks to the policy, then history might view Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell (and Don’t Harass) as the foundation of something that was ultimately successful. I’m not saying my Fortresses of Enlightenment policy goes far enough. I just see it as the next sensible step. Ultimately, we need undiluted tolerance. But getting there could be a long and bumpy road.
Even after seeing the failure of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell up close, I still believe in you, Bill Clinton, and your ability to work magic through small, sensible tweaks to public policy. Thanks for listening to me on this subject. Hell of a war, huh? Thanks again for all those years of relative peace and prosperity.
John Hoff welcomes comments at [email protected].
