Three prior Fort Gordon linguists discuss DOD policy on gays in the military and how it affected their service to the country

Source: Metro Spirit
Author(s): Angel Cleary
Date: August 29, 2007

AUGUSTA, GA. - Fort Gordon’s second biggest secret is the National Security Agency’s (NSA) clandestine security contingency of multi-service and civilian linguists doing translation. If linguists meet a local in a bar, they’re supposed to “neither confirm nor deny its existence.”

 

But the biggest taboo is one military personnel aren’t even allowed to discuss amongst themselves — whether or not someone is gay.

 

However, three prior linguists who were stationed at Fort Gordon say the Department of Defense’s (DOD) strict “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy is ineffective. Military members are often openly gay among their unit members. Soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines often live together off post. Supervisors know their subordinates are gay. Some commanders know. And yet they choose to ignore it.

 

Two of them made it through the Air Force without “being discovered.” They served honorably and moved on to the civilian world.

 

One, Navy Petty Officer 2nd Class Stephen Benjamin, was kicked out because his command found a message he wrote on a top-secret government messaging system. In the chat room, he told a friend he was dating another male. He was discharged, not because he discussed being gay with his cohorts; not because his homosexuality caused a lack of unit cohesion; not because he dated another man. His error was writing it down.

 

Why a gay man joins up

In 2001, Benjamin was still a high-school senior with a life of possibilities ahead of him. Then came 9/11.

 

“Before 9/11, I never really thought about [joining],” he says. Like many other patriotically motivated young men, he wanted to defend the country and so he joined the military right out of high school. He knew he was gay by the time he was in high school, he says, but while growing up in a conservative Christian family, he had become accustomed to repressing his identity.

 

“When I signed, I wasn’t really out at the time and didn’t think about it at all,” he says. “I only had told a couple of friends.”

 

He completed Navy basic training and at the Defense Language Institute, he graduated in the top 10 percent of his Arabic language course in Monterey, Calif. For two years he worked as a dedicated Iraqi linguist, translating top-secret communications in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom, and saving countless American ground soldiers’ lives.

 

“I never worried about the repercussions of being out,” he says. “It seemed like half of my office was gay. It was never a big deal.” He says it was considered an open secret.

 

“A lot of my straight friends would go out to karaoke with me in Augusta.” It was this open and accepting environment that led him to make comments about his sexual orientation on a monitored computer system.

 

A year ago, during a night shift in the midst of his translating mission, while “sitting rack” (listening to intercepted communications), he instant messaged with his roommate, who was stationed in Iraq. They made casual conversation and Benjamin mentioned who he was dating.

 

“I’d ask him if he wanted anything sent in the mail,” he says. Then weeks later during a routine inspection of a random day’s communications, officials discovered his remarks, along with about 70 others who were chatting on various separate channels.

 

“There was some ridiculous stuff going on,” he says. “There was a Navy channel where they had 15 pages of nothing but descriptions of oral sex.” All the sailors had their security badges revoked for investigation. They were subsequently reprimanded and the military docked their pay accordingly. All throughout the investigation, Benjamin says no one asked him about his comments.

 

“I didn’t say anything remarkable or lewd,” he says in frustration. “Other than that, it was about my personal life and who was dating whom.” For a month he tensely waited to hear whether or not he would be discovered. Then the Navy command pulled him from shift for questioning.

 

“They called me in and asked, ‘Is what you said on the channel true?’” he says. “The woman [doing the investigation] wouldn’t say the word gay or homosexual.” He says he could tell she didn’t want to be doing the investigation.

 

Rather than lie, he chose silence, as DOD policy states. Two weeks later, the Navy notified him it was making plans to discharge him because he admitted in writing he was gay.

 

Which of these recruits is gay?

On the first night of military basic training, instructors typically force the new recruits to strip down naked, and they rush them regiment-style through a communal shower.

 

They shout threats and curse at the nude enlistees, who sidestep at attention from showerhead to showerhead, spending 10 seconds or so each under the stream. It would be an otherwise major feat to get 50 or more recruits showered in two minutes. When they’re naked, terrified and vulnerable, it’s pretty simple. Most recruits go to sleep with soap still dripping from somewhere extremely sensitive.

 

It’s a scare tactic on that integral first day in training that the military uses to send a message of absolute authority to undisciplined soldiers.

 

It’s situations like these that proponents of the ban on homosexuals serving in the military cite. If homosexuals were to participate in intimate situations like these, they say, it would create a lack of unit cohesion and degrade morale.

 

But gay and lesbian recruits are there in the showers, Benjamin says, and like the straight recruits standing next to them, they are petrified of getting ripped a new one by a training instructor.

 

“Policy makers are really just worried about other people looking at other people’s junk,” he says, casting aside the main arguments against repealing “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”

 

Benjamin made national headlines in March, when the Associated Press reported his dismissal.

 

“It was kind of a shock,” he says about being forced to leave. “I was incredulous that they were actually doing this.”

 

In an interview with the AP, Benjamin stated, “I was always discreet; I never considered it would be an issue. I thought if I don’t say anything, they’re not going to ask me. But it was more aggressive than I thought.”

 

Complicating the matter

Conservative opponents of repealing the ban, like the Center for Military Readiness (CMR), a small non-profit lobbying organization that pumps out information regarding military issues and policies, cite examples just like Benjamin’s to show how “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” doesn’t work because it conflicts with the letter of the law.

 

“What generally gets misreported,” says Tom Sears, CMR executive director, addressing a common myth, “is that they are eligible to serve under ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.’” He says confusion as to the meaning of the law makes gays and lesbians think they can join if they remain silent.

 

Recruits don’t understand, he says, what the law states regarding eligibility to serve.

 

According to the 1994 Section 654, Title 10, a statute in a part of a larger yearly bill Congress signs, anyone who is homosexual is not eligible for military service and, if discovered to be so, must be released.

 

Sears says the DOD “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy received significant publicity in 1994 when Clinton created it — right after he signed the congressional bill to bar homosexuals from enlisting — which is why the law that actually doesn’t have a name is commonly called “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” He says the DOD policy should be repealed and CMR advocates that President Bush strike the conflicting policy. Then, opponents say, homosexuals won’t be persuaded that they are eligible to join in the first place.

 

Sears says Bush hasn’t revoked Clinton’s policy because of the pressure on political correctness.

 

“Somehow it would show a perceived hostility towards homosexuals by repealing the policy,” he says.

 

He’s exactly right, says Jeremy Francis, who was an Air Force staff sergeant stationed as a Hebrew linguist at Fort Gordon.

 

“It’s a socially discriminatory law that obviously doesn’t work,” says the buoyant 6-foot-tall man. He served an honorable seven years of service, winning awards and achieving high evaluation ratings — all with his co-workers’ knowledge of his sexual identity. He says the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy doesn’t work to keep homosexuals in the closet.

 

“It felt like it was a secret at first. It’s not like I was out telling people about it. But the longer I was stationed there, and the more people knew, the less a deal their knowing became.” Most of his colleagues knew. He even lived off post, sharing an apartment with his partner, who was also in the military.

 

“I was very controlled about discussing my life, but once I told people, they didn’t care at all.” When his immediate supervisor, a Navy petty officer in his shop, found out, Francis says he didn’t bat an eyelash.

 

“He never said anything to me about it when he overheard me talking about my personal life to someone,” he says. He says his sexuality was never a disruption and, to his knowledge, remained a non-issue for those working around him. For this reason, he thinks the law should be repealed.

 

Coming out about coming out

Many high-level officials have come out in favor of re-examining the ban. They argue that the policy, combined with the law, is a civil rights violation. The debate was rekindled this March, when Joint Chiefs of Staff (JSC) General Peter Pace made a comment in a press conference stating he believes homosexuality is immoral. Since then, Congressional support for a bill to repeal the policy has grown.

 

In February, Representative Martin T. Meehan, D-Mass., re-introduced the Military Readiness Enhancement Act, which would repeal the 1994 ban. So far, 131 members have co-sponsored the bill. Of the 131 co-sponsors, two Georgia representatives have signed — Rep. Henry C. “Hank” Johnson, Jr. and Rep. John Lewis.

 

Another important human rights advocate has come forward with his support of repeal. In May this year, Nobel Peace Prize winner and former President Jimmy Carter released a statement to the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network (SLDN), stating: “‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ is the only law in America today that regulates a group of citizens then prohibits them from identifying themselves and speaking up on their own behalf. Gay soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines are unable to tell their member of Congress or their commander that the policy is an abject failure and they are living proof because they will face discharge. Those who defend our liberties and freedoms deserve better.”

 

In a New York Times op-ed, prior Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman and U.S. Army General John Shalikashvili discussed how, after talking with enlisted soldiers, his views on the ban changed.

 

“These conversations showed me just how much the military has changed and that gays and lesbians can be accepted by their peers,” he said.

 

For House members supporting the bill, the argument isn’t based on social advancement, even if that is where the motivation stems. The reasons are purely pragmatic. The act is supposed to help fulfill the needs of an all-volunteer military that is in the midst of a war and is facing recruiting shortfalls again. Meehan and the bill’s supporters say the military can’t afford to bar enlistees based on a social construct.

 

Recruiting issues

Since the anti-gay law of military service was implemented in 1994, more than 300 of those military members with linguistic skills have been discharged. To date, more than 11,000 of all service members have been forced out.

 

Benjamin says he is particularly frustrated because he was good at his job, which the military considered to be mission critical. The DOD will pay a $15,000 signing bonus to new recruits. For second- and third-time enlistees, re-enlistment bonuses top $60,000. That’s like winning the DOD lottery.

 

In 2005, the Government Accounting Office made a report to Congress that estimated the DOD spent about $95 million on recruiting and training to replace the 9,500 who had been kicked out for homosexuality in the 10-year period from 1993 to 2003.

 

However, the report also stated its findings were inconclusive because the DOD didn’t keep statistics necessary to make a full report. The report states “the DOD does not collect relevant cost data on inquiries and investigations, counseling and pastoral care, separation functions and discharge reviews” associated with expelling gays and lesbians under the policy.

 

So, in 2006, the University of Santa Barbara ran some numbers. In February of this year, the university said that in the decade after the ban, the Pentagon spent more than $360 million to discharge 9,500 service men and women under this policy.

 

How many are still serving and receiving services is another question entirely. For obvious reasons, the DOD doesn’t count homosexual enlistees.

 

Stephen Ralls, of the SLDN, who provides statistics on gay military members and assistance to those who are prosecuted, says the best estimate was done by UCLA Williams Institute researcher Gary Gates. He says he cross-referenced 2000 Census statistics of same-sex parent households with households reporting a parent in the military.

 

“His report estimates there are about 65,000 active and reserve military members serving,” says Ralls. He says SLDN knows of at least 500 members who have admitted to their workers or commanders that they are gay.

 

“They report to us that their commanders are looking the other way,” he says. Although he has no specific statistics from Fort Gordon about members who have separated under the policy this year, he says five from the fort have contacted SLDN. Two were Army, two were Navy and one was Air Force.

 

“They ask for various things, like advice about how to handle a harassment situation,” he says. “The problem is it’s tricky to report anti-gay harassment without outing yourself.”

 

Air Force Senior Airman John Matthews, whose name has been changed because he wants to remain anonymous, was stationed at the 31st Intelligence Squadron at Fort Gordon from 1997 to 2002. He says harassment and frustration forced him to make two attempts to get out by voluntarily making a statement about his homosexuality.

Ironically, both times, his superiors convinced him to stay in.

 

“The first time, I went to my sergeant and told her I was gay and I wanted to get out,” he says. “She pulled a picture of a woman out of her desk and said, ‘This is my partner.’” He says she counseled him that there were ways to cope with living a double lifestyle.

 

The second time he says he went higher in his command and they created “a file on him,” making preparations for him to separate. He says they soon realized that his role in a very highly skilled translating shop was too mission critical at that time. Rather than taking six months to train someone new, his immediate supervisor convinced him to stay. Matthews received the highly prized Joint Service Commendation Medal for translating and an Air Force Good Conduct Medal. He fulfilled his six-year service enlistment and was honorably discharged. His paperwork still classifies him as eligible to re-enlist.

 

Petty Officer 2nd Class Benjamin’s discharge paperwork bars him from rejoining. At a time when the military desperately needs linguists, Benjamin says he’s angry that he was kicked out. In 2001, the Army fell short of its recruiting requirements for linguists.

 

All our allies are doin’ it!

In the last 15 years, every single U.S. ally in the war on terror has repealed bans on homosexuals to serving openly gay — all without losing unit cohesion, or causing major disruptions to morale.

 

In 1992, Canada lifted its ban. The same year, Australia followed. In 1993, Israel, following public protests of Knesset hearings of gay military members, lifted its ban. Great Britain lifted its ban in 2000 when the European Court of Human Rights ruled the Ministry of Defence policy violated a soldier’s right to privacy.

 

In a complete 180-degree turnaround, the Royal Navy now runs ads in gay magazines to recruit service members.

 

Francis, who was stationed at Mildenhall RAF for two years before the end of his enlistment, says the environment in England was even more open than at Fort Gordon.

He says the relaxed atmosphere was due in large part to the influence of British culture, which is more open about sexuality in general. He says that overseas duty stations are also by nature less strict environments.

 

“I never spoke directly to [my supervisor] about my sexuality, but I know she knew I was dating men,” he says. “And she didn’t say anything about it.” This example, he says, made it possible for other members to be open.

 

“My sergeant came right up to me and he said, ‘I know you’re gay. And I don’t care.’”

 

The wrong side of history

Since being jettisoned by the Navy, Benjamin has enjoyed national celebrity. He made an appearance on “The Colbert Report” and has written op-eds for the New York Times and the Denver Post. He regularly blogs as a guest on HuffingtonPost.com. He is happy living in Atlanta working at a software company.

 

Still, though he believes it will bring attention to the cause, Benjamin feels bitter that his personal life became the subject of national debate.

 

“It’s absurd that we even have to discuss this issue,” he said in a blog entry. “It’s more absurd that as the Army desperately searches for recruits, this Congress and president cling to a failed policy that harms our nation.” If the policy changed tomorrow he might consider re-enlisting; but he thinks it will take a paradigm shift, as in WWII when women and African-Americans were allowed to serve.

 

“They are obviously on the wrong side of history,” says Benjamin regarding WWII policy makers who used similar arguments barring blacks and women from serving. “I don’t think this will change anytime soon. By the time it has, I will have moved on.”

 
Belkin sees this as a very dangerous shift:

 

While it may be that people who behave as Craig did are looking for sex, there remains an important difference between seeking sex and having public sex. Society certainly has a right to uphold standards of public decorum, but increasing criminalization of harmless behavior opens up a space for injustice unevenly applied.

And since so much of our attitudes toward sex and sexuality are based on fear, an opening is all we need.