Sea Stories: You seem a bit obsessed. Is there something you want to tell us?
In 1984, as a plebe at the U.S. Naval Academy, I knew by passing acquaintance a Midshipmen Third Class (a sophomore anywhere else) named Joe Steffan. By long tradition and institutional structure, Third Class “youngsters” were of little importance to plebes; they were neither the terrifying Second Class quasi-drill sergeants specifically tasked with “training” you, nor the august First Class Midshipmen (seniors) acting as the brigade leadership, standing as they did on the cusp of a commission. The youngsters existed, in our minds, almost entirely as something to become, hopefully; characterized more by what they were not: harassed freshmen or responsible upper class. As such, none had a particularly large impact on my life at the time. Joe I remember, however, for events in his life would plant a seed of doubt in my mind that has blossomed into a strong conviction that tends to dominate my limited blogging.
Joe was a highly professional and talented midshipman that would go on to become one of the top ranked midshipmen in his class. His bearing, academic performance, commitment, and involvement resulted in selection as a “Four Striper,” a Midshipman Lieutenant Commander. Only five others in his class were of higher rank. He was expelled six weeks before graduation for having revealed to a confident his growing belief that he was gay. His admission was reported to the officer leadership, and when questioned by his Company Officer, he answered truthfully. He was accused of no homosexual conduct; his separation from the military was predicated solely upon his admission of homosexuality. This was, of course, before Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.
The Naval Academy is a rumor factory built on a gossip economy, and this event produced an extraordinary bit of tongue wagging. I joined in with enthusiasm, reacting like pretty much every other Mid: with ridicule and fag jokes. But something started, some small gear turned.
In 1989, a year following my commission, I joined the wardroom of my first ship, a small East coast frigate. My primary job involved supervision of electronics technicians and their ilk, but like every other shipboard officer, I had several collateral duties, the most significant of which was Shipboard Legal Officer. If this sounds even vaguely impressive, as though it might imply JAG-like coolness, let me disabuse you: I received a grand total of three weeks training, and the job involved, almost exclusively, preparing paperwork for the non-judicial proceeding known as Captain’s Mast, and processing the documents for the administrative separation of the bad apples. Rarely were actual lawyers involved. Nonetheless, I was the face of the Uniform Code of Military Justice for many a sailor, and I kicked out my first queer in 1990. Nothing earth shattering, no complex investigation or lawyerly maneuvering, just a young guy quietly living with a lover, even known about by many of the crew, until the wrong dude found out and reported it. A few questions asked, an admission made, and he was gone.
The next one was more disturbing. He was a hard working deck hand, a book worm, a loner, and a fundamentalist Christian. He made the mistake of leaving a moderately erotic drawing of a partially nude male on his rack in his assigned group berthing compartment. Someone took it, reported it, officers questioned him, and then we kicked him out. But along the way, I learned about self loathing. This young man believed he was demon-haunted and devil-tempted. He could resist these urges so long as we stayed in our home port, where he could attend nightly services at his small church, and pray for strength with the handful of other worshippers. But when we left home port, spending weeks at sea where he had no access to his support group, he grew weak, and would seek anonymous sex in the usual hang outs at the first port call. He hated himself. He comes to mind often; I wonder if he ever came to terms with his sexuality, if he still exists in his self imposed purgatory, or if he killed himself. My questions and doubts grew.
I spent over four years as a legal officer, and that job accounts for both my most humorous and my saddest sea stories. In addition to the numerous drug users, the prostitute shooter, the thieves, racists, devil worshippers, disordered personalities, and a complete identity swapper, I also processed four homosexuals for separation. Right about when DADT came into being, I transferred ashore and progressed sufficiently in rank such that Shipboard Legal Officer was no longer a feasible collateral duty.
Over the next fifteen years, my ever-so-small question on the subject grew into a nagging doubt and then a firmly held conviction in direct opposition to the current policy, along with support for the majority of gay rights issues. This occurred independent of, indeed, prior to my self identification as a libertarian. As I have mentioned before, I came to my libertarianism late, and from the civil side. My willingness to engage others on the subject, however, did not manifest until my retirement date was largely determined, and promotion concerns not particularly relevant. How convenient.
My shipmates, coworkers, and Commanding Officers would likely tell you that my most apparent personality trait, and flaw, is my big, barely edited, hyperbolic, overly opinionated mouth. Following one particularly awkward incident involving myself, an unfortunate but innocent senior officer, and a whole lot of witnessing spouses, my CO gave me a one way dynamic counseling session, in which he told me: “From now on, in public settings, that thing you’re about to say? Don’t.” If only they knew how often I had already been self-censoring. For rarely did I admit, at least in anything other than a “let me play devil’s advocate manner,” my strong and growing convictions regarding a host of civil liberties issues. I was a coward. Only when my career was already over, when I was safely at home plate with my pension, have I truly opened up on this issue. Perhaps I feel I have a bit of making up to do.
I believe DADT was, in 1993, a reasonable compromise. In that era our society, and our military in particular, probably wasn’t ready for openly gay service members. The other significant social based transformations in the military: racial integration and expanding roles for women, did not proceed from zero to sixty overnight, but were, rather, functionally instituted in phases. But DADT has run its course, for our society and our military are far different today, at least in terms of toleration and acceptance of homosexuality. The DADT phase, sixteen years long so far, should end: we are ready for the next step. And yet over one thousand retired generals and admirals disagree, so obviously we have a tough row to hoe. As I mentioned previously, there were some pretty significant names missing from that list, not the least of which is Admiral Charles R. Larson, the only officer to serve as Superintendent of the Naval Academy twice, including during most of my, and Joe Steffan’s time at The Boat School on the Severn. In fact, Admiral Larson has not simply declined to sign the alarmist DADT support letter, but has come out forcefully in favor of equal treatment by topping a list of 104 admirals and generals who signed on to a repeal effort in 2008.
I take this as small, but significant comfort, and hope to do my part to support this effort.
Previous Sea Story here: Nicknames are Bad
Search Engine Hook: Hot Naked Sailors
Awesome post. What were you before you self identified as a libertarian? If you eventually worked your way towards that perspective via civil issues, what were you during and before that transition, if anything?
As for your search engine hook, there’s this great scene from the Arrested Development finale that seems appropriate.
Comment by Cameron — 4/17/2009 @ 9:08 pm
Ha! Very appropriate clip, Cameron. As to your question, I was contrarion independent with no consistant ideological perspective. If the present company waxed nostaligic for Reagan, I might secretly agree, but would talk of Iran-Contra. If they dismissed the criticisms (and excesses) of Clinton, I would speak glowingly of the character of Carter, despite his faults. In short, I was a walking troll.
Comment by Jack — 4/17/2009 @ 9:25 pm
Great post Jack.
My old roommate was caught up in DADT a few years ago. They actually tried to give her an OTH, but a really good DADT advocacy group in DC intervened. She was still forced out, but at least her discharge was honorable. It is completely the service’s loss; she was a great officer.
Admiral Larson was my Sup too my plebe and youngster years.
Comment by Liz — 4/17/2009 @ 9:36 pm
Jack, I really don’t think you have to apologize for not challenging your superiors about policy matters during your active career. I’ve long been a strong advocate of the repeal of DADT, but even I’m not interested in seeing active duty personnel contest the policy openly. I’d rather see them be as supportive of their gay shipmates as possible without posing specific policy challenges that could be seen as insubordinate.
That said, I am certainly glad of your growth on the issue, and I am saddened by your stories on the issue.
Comment by Rojas — 4/17/2009 @ 11:41 pm
Rojas, my bad for making this sound more melodramitc than I intended. It is not a matter of “not challenging superiors” and throwing myself on a sword, or anything with a whiff of martyrdom. Peers or superiors, for years I was unwilling to state my beliefs on this subject for fear of the negative perception that might generate. There is a difference between foolishly demanding a change in policy or I will resign, dagnabit, and simply saying, in the course of wardroom conversation, when the sujbect comes up: “Certainly we all have naval and military policies with which we disagree, for me, DADT tops that list.”
Comment by Jack — 4/18/2009 @ 10:30 am
I can identify with the sailor in your second story. I grew up religious and was in the Army for 5 years, made E-5 within the first three, and in the second year of my re-enlistment, 1981, I was discharged for homosexuality after trying to kill myself and it was reported to my CO that I was having a sexual identity crisis.
It is a pretty tough experience to go through, especially if your have problems accepting who you are. I told my friends and family that I was booted for drug abuse. After all, a junkie is better than a queer, right?
I was lucky enough to find an employer who for whatever reason believes that asking about your military service is discriminatory. So I didn’t have to go through the hell of having to explain that situtation one more time. I swear I think some of the HR people just had me in for interviews to question me about that part of my work history.
I really loved serving in the Army would have liked nothing more to have been able to serve until I retired as you did.
I cannot tell you how disappointed I was when DADT went into effect in 1993. Lifting the ban as Clinton wanted to do may have given me the opportunity to earn an honorable discharge and right, what I see as a terrible wrong which has haunted me for many years.
Really, a not so reasonable compromise.
Comment by jlxn — 4/24/2009 @ 11:32 am
jlxn,
I hope you are still around, I apologize for not responding earlier, I missed your comment. Two things:
1. Please look into applying to the Navy Board of Corrections regarding your characterization of discharge. Under the current policy, characterization is based on nature service, without prejudice as to the reason for discharge. (I recognize that there may be a diff between how it is supposed to be and how it is). It it is my understanding that a pre-DADT discharges can be upgraded based on the current policy. I would def look into it, perhaps contact the Palm Center for guidance.
2. OK, my “DADT was a reasonable compromise” sentence was inartful. DADT, at the time, was probably the best Clinton could do and still retain what he believed was enough capital to accomplish some of his other goals. But it was still unfair,and reenforced and perpetuated a negative vew, and I am ashamed of the military for having not simply lifted it. That the Democratic Party, in charge of both houses, has not corrected it is cowardly, particularly while Hillary was on the Defense Armed Services Committe.
Comment by Jack — 4/27/2009 @ 6:24 pm
He’s still around; commenting in other threads. And quite a quality addition.
Comment by Rojas — 4/27/2009 @ 11:41 pm