11/17/2006
Pentagon Upgrades Homosexuality: 'Mental Disorder' Now 'Defect'
What progress. The Pentagon is so backward it's outrageous:
According to the AP, "Pentagon spokeswoman Cynthia Smith said 'homosexuality should not have been characterized as a mental disorder. A clarification has been issued.'"
Instead of being classified alongside "Mental retardation" and "personality disorders" the new classification now puts being gay with "circumstances and defects" that could lead to retirement for a military officer. They are: "stammering or stuttering, dyslexia, sleepwalking, motion sickness, obesity, insect venom allergies and homosexuality."
Said Rep. Marty Meehan, (D-MA) of the House Armed Services Committee: "More than 30 years after the mental health community declassified homosexuality as a mental disorder, it is disappointing that the Pentagon still continues to mischaracterize it as a 'defect'."
Pentagon Alters Homosexuality Guidelines [nyt]
You may have missed...
Pentagon Document Lists Homosexuality as Mental Disorder [tr]
Posted 9:45 AM EST by Andy in Gay Rights, Military, News | Permalink
Like it?
Subscribe to FREE Towleroad daily headlines with our RSS feed!
RECENT STORIES:
Comments
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
Not surprising. The homophobia in the military is deeply ingrained. Besides, they can't very well recognize the reality that homosexuality is just a normal part of human existence because that would undermine their precious DA/DT.
Posted by: sam | Nov 17, 2006 9:54:59 AM
Can someone slap President Bush and the other so-called "leaders" of our military. Gay men - in the hundreds of thousands - have been serving in the US military for decades. It's just under the cover of a closet. Heck, I know gay people serving now.
Posted by: Ryan | Nov 17, 2006 10:03:44 AM
They have probably characterized it as a 'defect' since under the Bush administrations terrorism guidelines 'defectors' can be shot.
Why do the gays hate America?
Posted by: Crixi Van Cheek | Nov 17, 2006 10:24:43 AM
Should we be surprised by this? Just yesterday Dubya appointed Keroak to the head of the Family Planning department, and he's currently running an organization that is against contraception and abortion of any kind! It's all absurd, but nothing new here.
Posted by: Wayne | Nov 17, 2006 10:47:03 AM
I take back every bad thing I've ever said about Reichen. His round-the-clock red carpet hopping, nude calendars, front row fashion show seats, VIP stall at The Abbey, and Nobel Prize for Literature have obviously turned the tide. Mea culpa. Mea maxima culpa. Reichene non sum dignus.
Posted by: Leland | Nov 17, 2006 11:00:38 AM
The full quote from the Times is this: "The rules include sections that describes [sic] other specific conditions, circumstances and defects that also could lead to retirement, but are not physical disabilities." Among these specific conditions, circumstances, and defects, then are insect venom allergies, homosexuality, &c.
It is impossible to tell from the Times article whether or not the Pentagon considers homosexuality a "defect" and not, for example, and "condition that could lead to retirement." "Condition," here, would likely be used not in the mental-health sense, but rather in the "condition as defined as a particular state of existence." In such a case (and I'd put good money on official Pentagon documentation (after their initial gaffe) being drawn up by lawyers careful not to intimate necessarily that homosexuality is a defect/disorder), it is impossible to determine if even the Pentagon considers it a defect.
I don't know from that Times article what the document says about the specific classification and possible value judgment of homosexuality. No one does or can, and the fact that you left out the word "conditions" in your quoting changes the meaning considerably. That said, I do think that, however the Pentagon chooses to classify homosexuality, be it condition or defect or disorder or what have you, I do not feel that it should provide justification for an early discharge.
Then again, what doesn't provide justification for early discharge? According to that list, not much...
Posted by: arkadin | Nov 17, 2006 11:31:00 AM
As of a few seconds ago, SLDN had not yet posted their interpretation of this announcement. Until such experts do, it's pointless to speculate. As we've recently seen re their cost of AIDS drugs story, the AP can rarely be counted on to get any story right more complicated or nuanced than yesterday's baseball scores.
Posted by: Leland | Nov 17, 2006 12:37:06 PM
Shouldn't there be a public statement forthcoming from Reichen Lehmkuhl about this new development?
Posted by: web savvy | Nov 17, 2006 1:22:47 PM
They don't want to classify homosexuality as normal because it will conflict with don't ask, don't tell. Defects can get you kicked out of the military, normal behavior can't. Classify homosexuality as normal would give leavage to those that want gay men and women to serve open in service.
Posted by: Jake | Nov 17, 2006 3:49:09 PM
Unbelievable. But what do you expect from the military? Y'know what, let the military assholes go kill themselves in war..I won't be a part of it. They don't want us, I don't want them. Let their straight inventions undo them.
Posted by: Nikko | Nov 17, 2006 6:32:45 PM
There was a time in the military when the idea of allowing blacks to serve with whites was considered potentially damaging to troop morale. I guess back then black was a defect too.
History will not be kind to these people.
Posted by: mark m | Nov 18, 2006 12:20:16 PM
It's wonderful to know that so many quietly gay people must have died serving their great nation at the time of their 'defect'.
Posted by: EM | Nov 19, 2006 5:04:06 AM