Repeal of DADT Is A Major Victory, But There's Much More To Do

I was quite surprised and a bit amazed, given the gridlock of the U.S. Congress, that the repeal of DADT (Don't Ask, Don't Tell) was passed a couple of weeks ago. This didn't seem like a collection of legislators who were willing -- or had the courage -- to tackle such a divisive issue, but thankfully I was wrong. This was one time I was only too happy to be proved wrong!! Openly constraining the civil rights of a significant group within the military, people who were only too willing to fight and potentially die for their country, was simply wrong.

On the other hand, saying it's allowable to have another group in America become cannon fodder for the military war machine was sort of a phyrric victory for LGBT folks. They can now join the volunteer armed forces and legally serve -- and indeed, not being kicked out due to one's sexual preference is a major hurdle scaled. Given the paucity of employment elsewhere in the economy, the military is one of the few truly secure jobs left in the country.  It carries with it solid pay, good medical and schooling benefits, and a chance to patriotically devote oneself for the nation. But given the two wars in which the nation is mired and the high chance that a person (especially male soldiers, but increasingly female soldiers as well) will be sent 'into harm's way' during multiple tours of duty, whether as members of the National Guard or the regular military, having this rule overturned, while a great step forward, is a victory that carries a lot of potential pain. At least the 'body politic' is more healed with this action, if not the actual 'physical bodies' of the citizens in uniform.

But the larger 'step forward' is that, just before the entrance of a more conservative Congress, the country is having to 'face up to' the larger cultural shift in our society. While a number of states have passed Defense of Marriage Acts, trying to limit marriage to one man and one woman (and thereby excluding LGBT citizens, even while failing to enforce anti-polygamy laws in Utah and Texas), in contrast at least six states have passed civil union legislation, and a few of them allow legal marriage. Illinois is on the verge of becoming another state that allows civil unions, which while not as strong a legal protection as legal marriage, is clearly a step toward that possibility.

The one group, though, that is not being addressed in this legislation are transgender populations. The 'T' in the LGBT coalition is, once again, being shortchanged, though it must be admitted that changing the law only comes after the citizen are educated enough -- and comfortable enough -- to allow the change. The wider population, especially younger voters, have grown up with a fair degree of tolerance for LGBT people (in spite of the hate crimes that are perpetrated periodically or the harassment that same-sex youth experience in secondary school systems) and it is their relative comfort that is allowing this sea-change in the law. Most citizens, though, have not come to grips with -- or really know much about -- the issues facing transgender and transsexual populations.

This lack of knowledge extends to at least some of their gay, lesbian, and bisexual allies in the LGBT, many of whom assume that an individual should be 'either one or the other', not something else entirely. Whereas the issues related to sexual preference are somewhat understood by many in the wider public, the rejection of binary gender categories has a much wider gap to be overcome, both in the straight and gay populations. In contrast to the 5 - 10% of the population who are LGB, more like 1% are transgender or transsexual (or such are the current estimates). That lack of numbers, as well as a lack of 'organized political force' fails, at present, to allow trans-persons the ability to have a prominent impact on the American political and legal system. This is especially true given how many transsexual men and women want to 'successfully pass', 'blend into the society', and not be 'open' about their trans-status (which is hardly surprising, given the horrific hate crimes perpetrated on them and the widespread discrimination they face, even more prominent than for LGB populations).

Change, in the cultural and legal system, at best occurs slowly and incrementally, though clearly and quite understandably people who are the butt of discrimination would wish it to move more expeditiously. The modern civil rights movement, started in 1948, didn't achieve significant national change until 1961 with the outlawing of racial discrimination in interstate transportation and the Voting Rights Act in 1965. And 45 years later, African Americans are still facing widespread discrimination, both in military and civilian life.

The modern gay and lesbian movements began in the 1950's, took a significant turn toward activism following the Stonewall Riots in 1969, and only slowly began to have national impact following the activism related to reactions within the gay community to the advent of AIDS and the devastation it caused. The original DADT, under President Clinton, was seen at the time as a 'step forward', albeit a limited step. It took a further 16 years to move beyond that limitation to the repeal of DADT -- and the acceptance by the military ranks [via Congressional legislation] -- for LGB people to have a 'right' to serve in the military. Least we forget, it was only in 2004 that the Texas law that made consensual relations between same-sex adults a crime (a law that had been replicated in a number of other states) was declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court.

The ERA (Equal Rights Amendment) was defeated in 1984, in part, because of the fear that females would be required to serve in military combat units. Yet, in the years since women have slowly, through their own efforts, been able to serve in military police units that have at least quasi-combat roles. This change, however, has not stopped the discrimination to which females are subjected in the ranks, nor has it put an end to periodic rapes in the military services. Passing legislation that recognizes the right of LGB populations, who openly declare their sexual preference, to serve in the military will not overnight stop discrimination against them nor will it assure that they will not be subjected to continued physical abuse. While the impact of discriminatory practices is painful and negatively affects the targeted population, changing those laws requires first a change in the social attitudes by the larger public toward those targeted groups, followed by lobbying for legislative change.

Hence, it will take a while, yet, before the larger culture is open to widespread acceptance of transgender and transsexual persons, and tolerance for the difference they represent in a socio-cultural system that is so heavily predicated on the traditional gender binary division between male and female. Same sex couples being granted civil unions is a major step forward, but it will take longer (sorry, that is just the nature of incremental cultural change) for the society to come to grips with the further complexity posed by transgender populations who combine changes in gender identity with various combinations of sexual preference.