New Gay Military Magazine Headed for Base Newsstands

September 1, 2011 2:28 PM

With the official repeal of "don't ask, don't tell" less than a month away, members of the military can expect to see a new gay-themed magazine available at military exchange stores on Sept. 20 which is also the day that the repeal of DADT goes into effect and it is the day that a new gay-themed magazine will be available at military exchange stores. This particular issue will be free and will feature a photo spread of a number of active duty military personnel.
posted by 2manyusernames (97 comments total)

will feature a photo spread of a number of active duty military personnel

That doesn't sit right with me for some reason. I'm assuming that they have photospreads for straight women and men (and have had them for quite some time) but of active duty personnel? That... I just don't feel like that part is a good idea in a military organization regardless of the orientation your are presenting it to.
posted by Slackermagee at 2:32 PM on September 1, 2011 [2 favorites]

This particular issue will be free

Thats all that needed to be said. Its like the huge lecture hall back in college after the last friday afternoon lecture. Tons and tons of the free college newspaper everywhere.

Also, welcome to "Don't Ask but Do Tell!"
posted by hal_c_on at 2:35 PM on September 1, 2011

Pepsi Blue, woo woo!
posted by Brak at 2:35 PM on September 1, 2011

That doesn't sit right with me for some reason.

I think it's great, if for no other reason than the fact that every single "support our troops" conservative now has to face up to the reality of openly gay people serving in our military. I want to see them scream "support our troops" now, and be forced to acknowledge gay people as full members of society. I think repealing DADT is a great milestone in the Civil Rights of LGBT people. First, the military, now onto the rest.
posted by VikingSword at 2:37 PM on September 1, 2011 [31 favorites]

Awesome. I'm glad this became the law of our land.
posted by Ironmouth at 2:39 PM on September 1, 2011 [2 favorites]

Ovt Servum
posted by Smedleyman at 2:40 PM on September 1, 2011

So much for my hope that they'd solve this issue by simply getting rid of 90% of the military.
posted by GuyZero at 2:41 PM on September 1, 2011 [2 favorites]

In related news today: Group moves to halt attempts to reinstate DADT.
posted by ericb at 2:41 PM on September 1, 2011 [1 favorite]

Sometimes, and I know this is weird, but sometimes things like this just make me wish I was back in uniform, purely so if people asked if I was okay with it I could look at them in shock and say "of course."
posted by John Kenneth Fisher at 2:44 PM on September 1, 2011 [4 favorites]

...or as a gay pal of mine said earlier about DADT going away: I will always be behind our troops and back them up.
posted by Postroad at 2:45 PM on September 1, 2011 [1 favorite]

BTW -- the current issue of GQ has an interesting article on DADT ...

Tell: An Intimate History of Gay Men in the Military

"As 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' comes to an end, we sent Chris Heath to interview dozens of gay servicemen from the past and present to find out what life was really like as America's military struggled with its last great identity crisis."

posted by ericb at 2:46 PM on September 1, 2011 [2 favorites]

and will feature a photo spread of a number of active duty military personnel.

Oh my goodness, they are going to put pictures of active duty military personnel into a magazine by and about active duty military personnel.

Wait -- who else are they supposed to put pictures of in the magazine?
posted by jabberjaw at 2:46 PM on September 1, 2011 [4 favorites]

Slackermagee - are you thinking that this is going to be, like, a naked photospread? Because I don't get that impression from the links at all (but I might have missed something).
posted by muddgirl at 2:48 PM on September 1, 2011

I think Slackermagee imagines it to be half-naked/glamour type photos. That isn't the case.
posted by Static Vagabond at 2:49 PM on September 1, 2011

I mean, this is what the magazine states:

Our servicemembers will finally be able to serve openly, with integrity. And in celebration of one of our Nation’s historic moments, OutServe Magazine is publishing something very special – something that has not been done before in the entire history of our Nation’s military: almost a hundred actively serving military members are coming out in this next issue! After centuries of serving in the shadows, we are stepping forward and publicly expressing our commitment to our country and a commitment to our values of integrity, openness, and equality for everyone … page after page featuring pictures, bios and duty stations of the LGBT men and women who have finally been given a voice by their Nation.

I don't see anything remotely problematic about this.
posted by muddgirl at 2:50 PM on September 1, 2011 [6 favorites]

That doesn't sit right with me for some reason.

Is there a rule against it?
posted by empath at 2:54 PM on September 1, 2011

Yeah, I think it was a misinterpretation/misapprehension of the term "photo spread".
posted by kmz at 2:55 PM on September 1, 2011

I approve of this publication. It will help further dispel myths by showing people being people being solders.
posted by clavdivs at 2:56 PM on September 1, 2011 [3 favorites]

From the magazine:

A Reason To Live
She kept saying ‘okay, okay, okay, okay,’ as if she could somehow talk herself into accepting the complete destruction

The OutHeroes Project: Capt Rich Richenberg
As we count down the days to the final end of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” we are


What the hell? Are they saying that gay servicemembers can't complete a senten
posted by gurple at 2:57 PM on September 1, 2011 [1 favorite]

Agreed, cannot see the pub running a centerfold with a caption. "John and his M1A1" This will be a serious pub. good luck with the project.
posted by clavdivs at 2:58 PM on September 1, 2011

(Well, that was a fun experience with missing em tags)
posted by gurple at 2:59 PM on September 1, 2011

Reminds me of the essay Imperiled Men by Andres Dubus.
posted by KokuRyu at 3:03 PM on September 1, 2011

gurple - maybe you're being silly, but the cut-off blurbs are a function of whatever CMS widget they're using - I see it all over the place nowadays.
posted by muddgirl at 3:03 PM on September 1, 2011 [1 favorite]

Yeah, I was being silly. That's pretty poor UX design, in my book. They can't chop off the last word and replace it with "..."?
posted by gurple at 3:05 PM on September 1, 2011 [1 favorite]

Hate to say it, but I'm with the Log Cabin Republicans on this one. Making DADT cases in the works moot seems like a bad idea. Much better to get a SCotUS ruling on it. Pretty sure it will be 5-4 at least. Could be 6-3. I haven't heard Roberts hating on gays much, but maybe that's because I'm not looking.

But I'm happy it's (soon to be) gone no matter what, and I think the magazine is a great way to celebrate.
posted by Garm at 3:06 PM on September 1, 2011

GREENLIGHT IT.
posted by Bookhouse at 3:35 PM on September 1, 2011

Yeah, I was totally imaging this as, "Look at these hot active duty people of either gender! I really hope you're not serving with one of them (or maybe I do, ohohohoho) as that would be really awkward!". If, instead, its, "Look at these excellent examples of soldier who also happen to be gay, look, there's nothing holding you back now!" then that's awesome.

The speed at which this came out speaks to a certain momentum within the armed forces that existed before the whole repeal process began this year.
posted by Slackermagee at 3:38 PM on September 1, 2011

Wow, this won't cause conservatives to shit themselves with self righteous fury.
posted by zzazazz at 3:40 PM on September 1, 2011

OutServe? Meh, but I guess it's better than Stars and OMG Not Horizontal Stripes!.
posted by FelliniBlank at 3:41 PM on September 1, 2011 [6 favorites]

I think they kind of have conservatives over a barrel with this. Do they hate gays more than they love the military? Talk about a wedge issue.
posted by Ad hominem at 3:51 PM on September 1, 2011 [8 favorites]

Yeah, OutServe seems like it's a magazine for the front of house in takeaway joints. Or maybe dyslexic tennis umpires. Or the German term for "to go."

I'm just glad that there's finally a publication that turns the latent homoeroticism of military-themed magazines into overt homoeroticism.
posted by klangklangston at 3:52 PM on September 1, 2011 [1 favorite]

OutServe makes me think of UpTalk.
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 3:56 PM on September 1, 2011 [1 favorite]

Again, I don't see any homoeroticism. It kind of seems like we're assuming that this is sexy because we associate homosexuality with sex (when we don't associate heterosexuality with sex, but rather with "family values" or whatever).
posted by muddgirl at 4:06 PM on September 1, 2011 [1 favorite]

I'm just wondering how this fits with DADT. If it's produced by service members, the subjects are open about being homosexual and the photos were taken during DADT, isn't it a DADT violating photoshoot?

Rebelious and whatnot.
posted by jaduncan at 4:14 PM on September 1, 2011

I think the idea is for the pub to have pictures that may involve depicting military stuff and that needs approval from DoD to use depending on what the subject matter is. That is not to say the pub will be a "hey, we are normal too" kinda deal, but it would be prudent to get DoD permission.
posted by clavdivs at 4:28 PM on September 1, 2011

How will this effect gay servicemen who have been transported back to anicent rome?
posted by The Whelk at 4:31 PM on September 1, 2011 [12 favorites]

For those who don't realize it, OutServe is an organization which has been around for a while, working "underground" to help make life better for LGBT servicemembers for years. They have chapters all over the world, and thousands of members. They started out as Citizens For Repeal and rebranded as OutServe about a year ago. Maybe I only know about them because I watch Gay USA every week, but I've certainly heard of them before.

That they're going to be doing a national hard-copy magazine is outstanding and awesome.

I applaud their efforts past and future. Niche magazines like this are what helped inform and fuel the LGBT movement since LONG before Stonewall. That this particular publication is appearing now doesn't surprise me in the least. I hope it finds an audience and gives support and a sense of community to those who read it.
posted by hippybear at 4:35 PM on September 1, 2011 [6 favorites]

Again, I don't see any homoeroticism. It kind of seems like we're assuming that this is sexy because we associate homosexuality with sex (when we don't associate heterosexuality with sex, but rather with "family values" or whatever).

The only eroticism I'd expect is inherent in the phrase "photo spreads" in that any glossy American magazine for any demographic from age 4 to age 84 is automatically going to be full of airbrushed "hot model" types.
posted by FelliniBlank at 4:36 PM on September 1, 2011 [2 favorites]

Anyway, let's look at the actual description of what this issue will feature:

[T]he upcoming September 20th Repeal Issue of the magazine will honor the gay, lesbian, and bisexual men and women who have proudly served their nation by featuring pictures and bios of nearly 100 OutServe members.

“This marks an incredible time in the history of our military. Gay, lesbian, and bisexual servicemembers once had to conceal their true identities. By featuring their pictures and their stories, we are signaling that time has passed. It is time for these military members to be honored for their extraordinary commitment and sacrifice in defense of our country,” said JD Smith, co-director of OutServe who goes by a pseudonym while DADT is still in effect.”

“OutServe Magazine will continue to expand over the next few months as DADT ends and we enter a new proud era of military history,” said J. Mills, executive editor of the magazine. “We cannot adequately express our gratitude to the military community and distributors who have been very supportive of OutServe Magazine.”

Plus it looks like Amazon and MetLife are going to be supporting the publication of this magazine as it transitions into a new era out of its underground status.

This gets more excellent the more I read about it.
posted by hippybear at 4:42 PM on September 1, 2011

the comments on the fox article were predictably depressing.
posted by modernnomad at 4:45 PM on September 1, 2011

I have mixed feelings about these folks publishing their pictures. On the one hand, I think they're incredibly brave people leading the way to a more open society. On the other, I think they're really asking for trouble, given the homophobic and/or macho mindset of many in today's military. Their officers and fellow soldiers knowing their names and faces mean they are potential targets for covert harassment, career derailment, and crappy assignments. I'm darn sure I wouldn't want to be in a war zone with homophobic soldiers behind me. They don't even have to actively fire, all they have to do is provide inadequate cover fire. Whoops.
posted by BlueHorse at 5:11 PM on September 1, 2011

Yeah, I was being silly. That's pretty poor UX design, in my book. They can't chop off the last word and replace it with "..."?

overflow:hidden;
white-space:nowrap;
text-overflow:ellipsis;

Specify a width and you're good, but Mozilla isn't into that sort of thing and you have to rely on jQuery.

BlueHorse: If people continue to be scared of who they are, people are going to continue to be scared of them. This publication is fantastic.

It makes me interested in knowing if there is a military social/blogging network or something like that that profiles all of our soldiers and gives them an outlet to talk about their day-to-day duties, post pictures, etc. I think that would actually be quite beneficially for potential recruits.

Does this exist?
posted by june made him a gemini at 5:19 PM on September 1, 2011

BlueHorse: Yes, it's always better to hide and be ashamed and afraid than to stand up and be who you are in an open way. That's the lesson we've all been learning since the early 1950s when homophile organizations formed. Coming out can result in personal danger! Best stay in the closet!
posted by hippybear at 5:20 PM on September 1, 2011 [1 favorite]

Yes, some these folks are going to be at risk, but they already were at risk and now, at least on paper, they'll have some sort of official recourse, which may or may not be worth anything in practice. Civil rights were never won without people with this level of fortitude facing grave danger to improve the lives of everyone around them. It's easy for me to say that glibly when it's not my ass on the line here, and I don't think any of these people's asses should be there either, but they're making informed choices on principle, and that's their call.
posted by FelliniBlank at 5:22 PM on September 1, 2011

God, wouldn't it be great if on Sept. 20, every gay service member came out? It'd be like the Buffy finale.
posted by FelliniBlank at 5:31 PM on September 1, 2011 [15 favorites]

"Anyone who can be queer, WILL be queer"
posted by The Whelk at 5:32 PM on September 1, 2011 [3 favorites]

I'd bet some amount of money that the fellow soldiers and COs of many if not all of the folks in this issue already knew, and didn't care.
posted by rtha at 5:46 PM on September 1, 2011

Is a remix of the Village People's "In The Navy" forthcoming? Seems like a no-brainer.
posted by jonmc at 5:48 PM on September 1, 2011 [3 favorites]

I think what everyone should practice is" don't tell, it's none of your business." It's everybody ( gay or straight) bragging about their sex lives in pubic that causes these problems in the first place. maintain some privacy and dignity people.
posted by bettepage at 5:55 PM on September 1, 2011 [2 favorites]

ha ha just saw my typo! pubic should be public.
posted by bettepage at 5:56 PM on September 1, 2011

but that's the opposite of your post.
posted by The Whelk at 6:06 PM on September 1, 2011 [1 favorite]

the comments on the fox article were predictably depressing.
posted by modernnomad at 4:45 PM on September 1 [+] [!]

Are you kidding? The amount of bawww there is hilarious.
posted by Snyder at 6:09 PM on September 1, 2011

If only we could peek under that Freudian slip!
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 6:11 PM on September 1, 2011

It's heartening that print media is still relevant somewhere.
posted by michaelh at 6:13 PM on September 1, 2011 [1 favorite]

public should be rubric
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 6:14 PM on September 1, 2011

I think what everyone should practice is" don't tell, it's none of your business." It's everybody ( gay or straight) bragging about their sex lives in pubic that causes these problems in the first place. maintain some privacy and dignity people.

The thing is, the vast majority of adults don't brag about their sex lives in public all that much. Obviously, there's more of that in some environments -- often same-sex buddy bonding situations. But what straight people are privileged to do in our culture is to not edit the way they talk about their ordinary lives. They can say "Jim and I went to the farmer's market last weekend and bought about a hundred peaches" or "The old dog sleeps at the foot of the bed, but this new one wants to sleep right between us, and it's really uncomfortable" without anyone hyperventilating or claiming that they're being loud or flamboyant or rubbing everyone's noses in their sexuality.
posted by FelliniBlank at 6:15 PM on September 1, 2011 [17 favorites]

Are you kidding? The amount of bawww there is hilarious.

Do these people not know what quiche is? It's an egg pie. Usually filled with ham. I don't even....
posted by The Whelk at 6:15 PM on September 1, 2011

I think what everyone should practice is" don't tell, it's none of your business." It's everybody ( gay or straight) bragging about their sex lives in pubic that causes these problems in the first place. maintain some privacy and dignity people.

Bullshit. Bullshit. Bull. Shit.

The problem is that when someone at work asks me what I'm doing for the weekend, I have to choose between saying that I'm going to my boyfriend's parents place, or lying, and I'm not sure if telling the truth will cost me my job. The problem is that holding hands with my boyfriend in public can put us both in considerable danger. The problem isn't that we're gay; the problem is the ignorant, hatred-filled, loathsome filth that can't deal with the idea of two people in love if those two people don't conform to their bigoted expectation.

Holding hands with my boyfriend isn't bragging about my sex life. Being honest about my boyfriend's presence in my life, to the same extent that straight people talk about their partners, isn't bragging about my sex life. It's my life; it's who I love. Try lying about that sometime, and see how it makes you feel.

Being honest about who we love didn't cause the problem. Being honest about who we love, in the face of unimaginable danger for decades, insisting that love isn't wrong... that's what got us even this far.

Retreating into the closet isn't going to get us any farther.
posted by MrVisible at 6:17 PM on September 1, 2011 [38 favorites]

Indeed - I would say that being honest about who we love is one of the most noble things one can do.
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 6:27 PM on September 1, 2011 [2 favorites]

I think what everyone should practice is" don't tell, it's none of your business." It's everybody ( gay or straight) bragging about their sex lives in pubic that causes these problems in the first place. maintain some privacy and dignity people.

So in your ideal world, nobody would ever mention their spouse by name, or go out in public together, or bring the family to a company picnic, because it's "bragging about their sex lives"? Really? No double standard whatsoever there?
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 6:55 PM on September 1, 2011 [1 favorite]

Do not feed the troll.

Seriously, someone that stupid could not find their way to Metafilter. T-R-O-L-L.
posted by desjardins at 7:03 PM on September 1, 2011

This makes me happy.

For the people imagining naked photospreads and whatnot: try substituting "newsletter" for "magazine". It's going to be aimed mostly at the same people (gay service- men and women) who're featured in the articles.
posted by subdee at 7:12 PM on September 1, 2011

It's only a "magazine" because this group is 1) geographically scattered and 2) big enough to count as its own demographic niche. Which, by the way, also makes me very happy (the second thing).

I hope there is an online version, for people who are afraid to buy the thing in print. But I also like that it will be in print next to the other magazines, as a part of the public conversation about it means to be in the military.
posted by subdee at 7:17 PM on September 1, 2011

Yes, never let the children out of the house. They're just symbolic bragging about fucking, aren't they?

Heck, let's ban all wedding rings, married couples shopping together. In fact, I say separate housing for all adults regardless of marital status. Walking out the same front door in the morning is simply bragging about fucking.

Jebus. Some people are as ignorant as racist bigots, only they think what they have to share will actually be well received.
posted by hippybear at 7:18 PM on September 1, 2011 [1 favorite]

Not that it matters, but I support this photo spread fully. In my experience watching the tide turn in MA, there is nothing more critical than folks seeing that gay people are just like them. This sounds simple, but it's surprising just how big of a revelation this is to people who have not had much prior exposure (that they know of, at least) to the GLBT world.
posted by rollbiz at 7:24 PM on September 1, 2011

I hope there is an online version, for people who are afraid to buy the thing in print.

It's been an electronic magazine published bi-monthly since March. There's a "subscribe to the digital magazine" link right on their website, actually, prominently placed.

If you know of any military unit which may want to subscribe to the print publication, have them email [e-mail]. The subscription is free, courtesy of Amazon and MetLife.
posted by hippybear at 7:27 PM on September 1, 2011

A video for increased context:

Rachel Maddow interviews the founder of OutServe (from Dec 2 2010)
posted by hippybear at 7:34 PM on September 1, 2011

I think they're really asking for trouble, given the homophobic and/or macho mindset of many in today's military.

Do you think they don't know this? I think they know this and have chosen to do it anyway, which is pretty fucking brave. Wait, isn't that one of the core elements of what makes a great soldier?

I think what everyone should practice is" don't tell, it's none of your business." It's everybody ( gay or straight) bragging about their sex lives in pubic that causes these problems in the first place. maintain some privacy and dignity people.

I hope you've never talked to acquaintances or co-workers about any relationship you've ever been in (even if asked), because it's people bragging about your sex life that causes these problems in the first place.

I hope that if you're in a relationship, you are never seen with your partner acting in any way that would indicate as much, because it's people bragging about your sex life that causes these problems in the first place.

I hope that if you're married, you don't wear a wedding ring, because it's people bragging about your sex life that causes these problems in the first place.

I hope that if you're married, you don't file your taxes jointly, because it's people bragging about your sex life that causes these problems in the first place.

I hope that if you have a child with someone, you hide them away from the rest of the world, because it's people bragging about your sex life that causes these problems in the first place.

I hope that if you have a partner and you or they become ill, you do not visit them in the hospital as a partner or spouse, because it's people bragging about your sex life that causes these problems in the first place.

Do you see the problem with the line you've drawn between points A and B? Because if not, I could go on...
posted by rollbiz at 7:49 PM on September 1, 2011 [3 favorites]

Do these people not know what quiche is? It's an egg pie. Usually filled with ham. I don't even...."

What's it called without the crust? I made a thai curry one a them (not really a custard) a couple nights ago that was crazy delicious.
posted by klangklangston at 8:06 PM on September 1, 2011

Also, this is probably the only new (commercial) magazine that I've heard about in the last couple years that doesn't seem like an anachronistic vanity project doomed to failure. It's got a demographic (armed services) that's still much more print-loyal than the general populace, a defined nice and an emerging market.

I'm not gay or in the military, but I wonder if they're hiring…
posted by klangklangston at 8:07 PM on September 1, 2011 [1 favorite]

A Frittata maybe Klang, it's more or less the same thing.
posted by The Whelk at 8:11 PM on September 1, 2011

A Frittata maybe Klang, it's more or less the same thing.

DON'T YOU EVEN
posted by rollbiz at 8:17 PM on September 1, 2011

GRITS AND POLENTA ARE THE SAME FUCKING THING WITH DIFFERENT STOCKS DEAL WITH IT
posted by The Whelk at 8:20 PM on September 1, 2011 [3 favorites]

I thought fritatas were cooked all in one and fried… This was almost like a custard, except with cheese. I went with more the Gordon Ramsay scramble method (lots of butter), and I overcooked it just enough to keep firm them up to a quichey texture.

I was hoping there was a word for it.
posted by klangklangston at 8:24 PM on September 1, 2011

Can civilians get a copy of this publication?
posted by bendy at 9:04 PM on September 1, 2011

I was hoping there was a word for it.

Yes, there is! The word is WRONG.
posted by rollbiz at 9:05 PM on September 1, 2011

Can civilians get a copy of this publication?

Yes. Sign up using the "subscribe to the digital magazine" field in the middle-right of the page.
posted by rollbiz at 9:09 PM on September 1, 2011

Omelette. The word is omelette.
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 9:11 PM on September 1, 2011

I once read a translation on the barb not a homme but an omelette as " not a man but a manatee"
posted by The Whelk at 9:44 PM on September 1, 2011

Their officers and fellow soldiers knowing their names and faces mean they are potential targets for covert harassment, career derailment, and crappy assignments.

Let's look at the facts ...

• 73 percent of military personnel are comfortable with lesbians and gays (Zogby International, 2006).

• Majorities of weekly churchgoers (60 percent), conservatives (58 percent), and Republicans (58 percent) now favor repeal of DADT (Gallup, 2009).

• 75 percent of Americans support gays serving openly - up from just 44 percent in 1993 (ABC News/Washington Post, 2008).

• In 1993, RAND Corp. concluded that openly gay people in the U.S. military do not negatively impact unit cohesion, morale, good order or military readiness. An update of this study should be completed in the next 90 days.

• Several other military-commissioned and GAO studies have concluded that open service does not undermine military readiness, troop morale or national security.

• Today, there are at least 66,000 gay Americans serving on active duty and one million gay veterans in the United States, according to the Urban Institute.*

Additional research and polls.

posted by ericb at 11:53 PM on September 1, 2011 [4 favorites]

In 2006, a poll by Zogby International of Iraq and Afghanistan veterans found that three-quarters were comfortable around gay service members.

That's three out of four!
posted by ericb at 12:00 AM on September 2, 2011

Straight Guys Tell

"You’ve heard the threats -- about how gay men in the shower might bring down the U.S. military with a wink, a pinch, or a flick of a wet towel. But where’s the truth in that? What’s it really like to serve alongside gay and lesbian service members?"

posted by ericb at 12:03 AM on September 2, 2011 [1 favorite]

Y'know, 100.00% of troops surveyed would not intentionally shoot unarmed civilians, keep fingers of the dead as souvenirs or torture prisoners.

Actions not words, that's what I'm saying. Let's see what happens.
posted by dickasso at 2:40 AM on September 2, 2011

Y'know, 100.00% of troops surveyed would not intentionally shoot unarmed civilians, keep fingers of the dead as souvenirs or torture prisoners.

I would lay money that in a anonymous survey this is not the result you'd get.
posted by jaduncan at 5:25 AM on September 2, 2011

Y'know, 100.00% of troops surveyed would not intentionally shoot unarmed civilians, keep fingers of the dead as souvenirs or torture prisoners.

People do these things. I don't think you understand what 100.00% means. But yeah, I get the point, almost all troops would not do these things.
posted by madcaptenor at 7:23 AM on September 2, 2011

Men eat eggs. Men eat pie. So why the hell don't men eat quiche?

(Seriously, people. Food has no gender. Unless there are men out there who are only eating eggs laid by roosters.)
posted by madcaptenor at 7:37 AM on September 2, 2011

Something something rooster something something cock
posted by The Whelk at 7:40 AM on September 2, 2011 [1 favorite]

I think the point was that people will lie on surveys to make themselves look better, and therefore even though 3 out of 4 soldiers claim to be OK with serving with openly gay soliders, some of them are lying and they will take this opportunity to track down ever soldier featured in this spread and torment them, or something.

Of course, I don't see how that's any worse than the current status quo, where gay servicemembers either live in constant fear of discovery, or are essentially already out to their unit, living with the risk of pissing off the wrong person who will use their status against them. At least now, if they are harassed there should be both social and institutional support for solving the problem in a way that's not, "Kick the gay kid out of the service."
posted by muddgirl at 7:42 AM on September 2, 2011

My wife and I perform weddings in DC, most of them same-sex. It has occured to me that the gay service members who get married are, in effect, outing themselves by publically registering themselves as gay. Talk about stepping up.
posted by MrMoonPie at 7:48 AM on September 2, 2011

"Omelette. The word is omelette."

Omelettes are folded. And they're whipped prior to cooking, and the eggs are separate from the optional ingredients.

I made the dish with no name.
posted by klangklangston at 10:22 AM on September 2, 2011

Let's say a member of the military physically assaulted and/or harassed one of their gay peers. What legal consequences would they face?

While I certainly don't want anyone to get physically assaulted and/or harassed, I do look forward to a first case where someone gets the book thrown at them.

I'm not going to be overly optimistic, however.
posted by Sticherbeast at 10:26 AM on September 2, 2011

That was a pretty great article, Ericb.
posted by klangklangston at 10:33 AM on September 2, 2011

I made the dish with no name.

Souffle?
posted by hippybear at 4:18 AM on September 5, 2011

looks like that district court ruling was reversed on mootness grounds. not a surprise. a couple of very close friends work for the DOJ and we discussed whether or not there is a constitutional right to military service. such a right does not exist.
posted by Ironmouth at 10:53 AM on September 29, 2011

Wait, which district court ruling?
posted by klangklangston at 12:12 PM on September 29, 2011

"A three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco tossed out a lawsuit that had challenged the military policy as a violation of gay service members’ civil rights. In doing so, the appeals court also dismissed a Southern California trial judge’s year-old ruling that the policy was unconstitutional."
posted by Sticherbeast at 12:48 PM on September 29, 2011

It seems to me like only one of three judges was willing to speculate on whether or not the Supreme Court would rule that it is discriminatory to exclude openly gay people from the military.
posted by muddgirl at 2:41 PM on September 29, 2011