Report: WH Deal Delays DADT Repeal, Lacks Non-Discrimination

Politico:

"Congressional leaders, gay rights advocates and Pentagon officials are meeting at the White House Monday morning to discuss an emerging deal on repealing the military's "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" ban on gays in the military, sources say."

The Wonk Room confirms the meeting.

The Advocate's Kerry Eleveld reports some details, with an emphasis on "delayed implementation".

"A White House aide who spoke on the condition of anonymity confirmed the White House meeting. "Our understanding is that Congress is determined to act this week and we are learning more about their proposal now," said the aide.  A Democratic leadership aide called the development "promising" but said discussions are ongoing. The House Democratic leadership is expected to meet about the proposal later this afternoon.

According to one person familiar with the White House meeting, the proposal that is being considered would repeal the current statute this year, but implementation of repeal would not take place until after completion of the Pentagon’s working group study in December. Further, repeal would require certification from President Barack Obama, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, and Joint Chiefs Chair Admiral Mike Mullen that the new law will not have a negative impact on readiness, recruitment, retention and other key factors that affect the military.

The language would not include a nondiscrimination policy but rather will return authority for open service by gays and lesbians back to the Pentagon. A statement of administration is expected to be released this week, potentially as early as tomorrow."

Returning open service authority to the Pentagon and the lack of a non-discrimination clause are key data points. Sources indicate after repeal and the study's completion, the President would sign an executive order. But "when" is a question, as well as the EO's durability.

Comments

[Reggieh]

My question is -- will there be a moritiorium on DADT removals during this period of delayed implementation? If not, then this isn't worth it and is something of a sham

[Anonymous]

Let's talk about just what these military people are afraid of. I'll use the analogy of sports to flesh out my thinking.

I ran track and was involved with competitive sports.

In my experience, straight guys were often extremely sexually provocative in the shower and the locker room.

People in the military or sports say that the barracks and the locker rooms wouldn't be safe for straight guys.

But what they don't tell you is that their homophobia that this view is actually an expression of their own homoerotic fears.

Their fear is this: that their playful, perfectly innocent love for closeness with guys would be destroyed if the gay-light-of-day were shone in on them horse playing around.

A lot of things are allowed in the informal, casual spaces of military barrack showers and dorms and sports locker rooms and party rooms: shared sex with women, boners, touching or slapping of private parts, hugs, kisses and even more. Hell, I've seen guys slap, touch genitals and kiss on the lips on the field in public when they win or score.

These things are socially allowed in sports and the military as long as you don't say it's gay.

You see, it is OPENNESS around sexuality that is a bane to these straight hypocrites.

The late straight LGBT literary critic, Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick, pioneered the term "homosocial."

Homosociality is male-to-male or female-to-female bonding but without the explicit homosexual (or directly identified as erotic) context.

The military and sports are bastions of homosocial relations.

Some of us with sports or military backgrounds know that there is a fine line between homosocial and homosexual.

And what often defines that line is OPEN, ACCEPTING expression free of hypocrisy, game-playing, cover-ups, passive-aggression, and veiled behavior.

---

I agree with Reggieh. Two things need to happen:

(1) No more removals based on DADT.

(2) Past discharges need to be reinstated and those forced out need to have their records cleared.

The whole idea of not putting a nondiscrimination policy in place is shady.

It is also shady that the implementation does not have a rigid time table.

Regarding some things (though not all) I really disrespect our president. He shows a willingness to genuflect to people who he is supposed to manage on things that involve absolute, unequivocal discrimination.

[GRANT]

"The language would not include a nondiscrimination policy but rather will return authority for open service by gays and lesbians back to the Pentagon."

Doesn't that mean that things just go back to the way they were BEFORE DADT? Can't the Pentagon choose to ban gays and lesbians at any time they feel like it?

How is this a compromise?