"Are we prepared to promote conditions in which the living contact with God can be reestablished? For our lives today have become godless to the point of complete vacuity. God is no longer with us in the conscious sense of the word. He is denied, ignored, excluded from every claim to have a part in our daily life." - Alfred Delp, S.J.

Saturday, May 29, 2010

Homosexuals in the military.

The Fleet's In!
A new study/analysis released by the Family Research Council finds that homosexuals in the military are three times more likely to commit sexual assault than heterosexuals.  I really can't imagine that being true.  An adult male sexually assaulting another adult male - two rough and tumble military men, trained to kill - one raping another?  Really?  Even if the gay guy is super-butch and the other guy is not, it seems rather far fetched.   Maybe in prison that stuff goes on, but not in the military.  Or does it?
"The Family Research Council today released an analysis of publicly available documents which shows that homosexuals in the military are three times more likely to commit sexual assaults than heterosexuals are, relative to their numbers.
(F)igures suggest that homosexuals in the military are about three times more likely to commit sexual assaults than heterosexuals are," noted Sprigg. "Concerns about privacy when homosexuals share facilities like showers and sleeping quarters with heterosexuals are well grounded," he added.
"The report found that the most common type of homosexual assault is one in which the offender fondles or performs oral sex upon a sleeping victim." - FRC

Years ago if a guy tried something like that he'd be beaten to a pulp, and if he survived, dishonorably discharged.  It is difficult to believe things have changed that much.  Not that I'm approving of gay-bashing vigilante justice - but I have to believe a normal guy would wake up and defend himself in a situation like that - and a punch in the mouth would be warranted.
That said, I once worked with older gay men (I was in retail) who had been in the service and who seemed to have gotten along just fine in the military - especially the Navy - they loved it.  According to these guys, the sleeping or drunk straight guy could be had - and if their stories were true, there may be an exceptionally predatory type of gay man who enlists in the military just for that reason.  Again, according to the old-timers, the service could be sort of a voyeur's dream.  This is all anecdotal however - I can't prove what they told me was true.  Although I've heard of similar situations in seminaries and boys schools - night time attacks and shower antics.  I'm quite sure some men's health clubs continue to harbor similar voyeuristic types.
Anyway, the news reminded me of Paul Cadmus, whose painting I illustrated the post with simply because at some point in his career, Cadmus developed an interest in the sex lives of military men.  Most notably in a group of drawings and paintings depicting what sailors did on Shore Leave, the title of one of his more famous works.  (Another, The Fleet's In! was pretty much condemned by the Navy.  The work, although funded by the WPA was banned from exhibition.) The image above depicts a soldier cruising late at night in Bologna.  In the complete scene of the painting, the man at the table is not quite as obvious as he is in this detail.  What's my point?  What does this prove?  That gay men have always had a presence in the military?  Perhaps - the paintings certainly corroborate what my old bosses told me.  Does it prove gay military men are more predatory than their heterosexual counterparts?  I wouldn't know. 
Nevertheless, I have to imagine predatory behavior, at least in the sense of taking advantage of a vulnerable person (drunk, stoned, asleep) - given such an opportunity, is always a possibility - just as it is for military women to be victimized in similar circumstances.  Does it happen a lot?  Again, I don't know.  Can we trust military statistics?  I wonder.  The military has been accused of lies in the past.  They've at least dissimulated about rape claims made by women soldiers, how some soldiers died, harassment charges, and I don't know what else.
On the other hand, gay activists have told their share of lies as well, while continually misrepresenting the true nature of homosexual behavior.
The FRC analysis may no longer matter anyway.  Friday Congress gave in to gay political pressure, and voted to repeal the "don't ask, don't tell" ban on gays and lesbians serving openly in the military.  Looks as if gay people serving openly in the military is pretty much a done deal now.  I suppose Paul Cadmus would be happy - but then again, he knew they were always there anyway.  
Art: Detail: Notturno: Bologna - Paul Cadmus, 1957


  1. The Ministry of Disinformation (FRC) are about as biased as the Nazi Propaganda units in WW2

    I think you can discount pretty much anything they say on gay issues.

  2. Is the end of "Don't ask, don't tell" really that big of a deal? I mean, the military is a "mixed crowd" anyway. Probably always has been. I think it's better if people can be honest, it avoids a lot of misunderstandings.

  3. One of the disgusting things about commenting on the internet is people who come forth with their opinions without reading the original post or the documentation.

    If you check the original PDF document, Homosexual Assault in the Military, you would find 35 footnotes coming from a U.S. Navy and Marine Corps documents and military courts of appeals.


    Authors often choose documentation that supports their thesis. Whether there is no problem in the Army or Air Force is unlikely. I personally am aware of homosexuals in my Army unit in Germany, but only involving consensual activities.

    Those sources in the PDF do indicate that homosexual assault in the military does exist.

    I personally find this another case of the leadership of this country mandating the behavior of the working class. What will happen eventually will be more difficulties in recruitment as more and more units become commanded by homosexual officers and NCOs.

    And when officers and sergeants are homosexual, I have no doubt but that homosexual incidents and assaults will increase.

    But that makes no difference to legislators whose only interest is campaign financing and re-election.

    While the House of Representatives voted to repeal DADT, the Senate still has to act on it and they will not act before the Defense Department completes its analysis of the possible effects of repeal.

    And that will take some time.

  4. My apologies Ray - I didn't read all the info, just the blip from the FRC which I linked to in the post. Thanks for your input here - your comments add important detals those of us who just read the headlines really need to hear. Thanks!

  5. Melody - my main intent of the post was pretty much what you said: "the military is a "mixed crowd" anyway. Probably always has been." Which is why I used Cadmus to illustrate the point - plus the anecdotes from the talking old soldiers I worked with as a kid.

  6. BW - I don't trust any of the sources.

  7. One more thought Ray - you said:
    "And when officers and sergeants are homosexual, I have no doubt but that homosexual incidents and assaults will increase."

    Excellent point. We Catholics found that out in the priest abuse scandal.

  8. I guess that wherever "two or more" be congregated...there is going to be sex of one kind or another (unless we're talking about committed Christians/Catholics)...
    The "bitchy" side of the whole homosex thing, though, can get quite nasty...but, also women and men, in close quarters can be a very sexualized and nasty thing, as well.
    Nobody talks about "respect", "chastity", commitment to the greatest good...love of country, commitment to one's vows (married), being chaste (as a single)...instead, they hand out "rubbers" (sorry, here!) and just turn their heads...
    Sexual promiscuity and sexual congress among those who are committed to our country's safety is just wrong. Period.
    And if it happens, go to confession and attempt to do better.
    Yeah, that's it.
    From a "cloistered priest"...I do "get it"...but, come on, behave yourselves...ya hear?

  9. I was Active Duty Air Force when the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell (and Don't Pursue is also part of it) law was passed...It was a wonderful blessing. Prior to that all kinds of witch hunts could be inacted based on "rumors", or "appearances." Or even if someone just didn't like you they could spread a rumor that you were gay. God help you if you were a male with a slight build--as many 17 year olds are...

    The "Don't Ask, Don't Tell, Don't Pursue, means just that--No one in your chain of command can ask you if you are gay based on hearsay or rumors, if you are gay you are supposed to "keep it to yourself" in other words don't come out of the closet, and the Don't Pursue is that troops are not supposed to harasse or threaten other troops on suspicion of Homosexuality, or threaten "I'll tell the commander you're gay if you don't do this" type of thing.

    At the time it was a good middle ground..I knew a fair number of gay troops who felt that they could confide in me--since I was born and raised in California I was accepting of the gay individual and not like a bunch of rednecks who were out to "kill all faggots". They were scared to death about anyone finding out their "dirty little secret." But they were also some of the best troops I have every known.

    There are currently laws in the Federal government concerning anti- discrimination against Federal workers....and the military are indeed Federal Workers..all the excuses about the homosexuals were the same ones raised about blacks in the military and women in the military..but we also have Selective Service registration, and should the Draft ever be reinstated again, homosexuals would have to be drafted. It would be good to have proper legislation in place to protect everyone.

    God Bless all our military serving all around the world...in the US this weekend it is Memorial Day on Monday ..where it is a holiday to remember our fallen soldiers.


  10. Sara - Thanks - I was particularly interested in your take on this, knowing you had served in the military. God bless.

    (For some reason notification that people have commented are not coming in to my email - I don't know what is up with that?)

  11. I'm SSA and served as an Officer in the Air Force during the Clinton Administration when "Don't Ask/Don't Tell" was enacted and I can tell you I did not particularly feel drawn to treat homosexual Airmen preferentially, pursue men in locker room or "barracks" situations, etc. I only hoped I would be accepted based on performance and expected the same from my troops. I could go on but I get too upset over this issue. Bottomline: whether one agrees with same-sex behavior, a person who identifies as homosexual should be allowed to serve their country if they desire too. Persons with SSA are just as patriotic. God Bless ALL our troops.

  12. Doughboy - Thanks very much for your input - that is the kind of anecdote I was looking for. I can't imagine a homosexual being more iclined to sexual assault than a heterosexual - but this type of study I referred to plays on hysteria - much like some of the blogs who rail against every little issue that comes along.

    God reward you for your service to our country.


Please comment with charity and avoid ad hominem attacks. I exercise the right to delete comments I find inappropriate. If you use your real name there is a better chance your comment will stay put.