Gays In The Military, Football and the Slave Dilemma of the Confederacy
Dave Muskera, M.A.
June 13, 2008
In the waning years of the American Civil War, when it was obvious the South lacked the manpower and resources to win its struggle, consideration was finally given to utilizing plantation slaves in the Confederate army. In March 1865, Jefferson Davis, President of the Confederacy signed into law the "Negro Soldier Law" authorizing the enlistment of slaves into the military. It was not a popular decision. One indignant southern General wrote in his journal "If slaves will make good soldiers, our whole theory of slavery is wrong." It was typical that blacks were viewed as lazy, dull witted and cowardly. These characterizations were part of the self-serving stereotype that underpinned and helped to justify the enslavement of blacks and their frequent abominable treatment. If proof could be had that they were capable of being brave and competent fighting men, it would fly directly in the face of the stereotype, possibly destroying it. Many feared this outcome.
Indeed the Southīs "theory of slavery" was greatly wrong - but it was only shortly after President Davisīs decree went into effect that the war was over. So, the proof of what was most feared by people like the complaining southern general was to be found mostly in the not infrequent instances of valiant behavior on the part of many northern freed blacks serving in the Union Army.
In reading this bit of American history, I was struck by the parallel that inherently seems to exist between the slave soldier question of the Confederacy (from 140 years ago!) and the contemporary debate over gay men and women serving openly in the armed forces. Nearly all the objections offered against gays in the military - ranging from the "problem of taking showers together" (a concern mostly to up-tight and fantasy proned straight men) - to questions of gays being reliable in battle - points often made by old indignant generals, arise directly or indirectly from the many culturally accepted stereotypes that abound about gays. If, as the stereotypes or "theory" goes, gay men are effeminate, limp-wrested, physically weak swishes only interested in Broadway musicals, Barbara Streisand CD collections, home decorating and Tupper-Ware parties ,then how on earth could they even manage to get through the physical and emotional rigors of basic training? Or so goes the thinking - if not the spoken words - of many of those objecting to gays serving in the military.
How many remember Sergeant Jose Zuniga? At age 23, Zuniga was named the Sixth Army's 1992 Soldier of the Year. He served as a medic in the gulf war. He was then discharged under "Donīt ask, Donīt tell" in 1993 for revealing his sexual orientation by attending the 1993 gay rights march on Washington. An event I too (together with several hundred thousand others)was fortunate to attend - with, I might add, less dire consequence to my career.
Sergeant Zuniga is not the only gay man to have served with honor. Gay men and women have been in the military serving with distinction ever since the Prussian military genius, Baron von Steuben, came to this country to drill and whip into shape the undisciplined Continental Army during the Revolutionary War. Gay women have also been serving with distinction ever since our armed forces finally saw fit, at the beginning of the 20th century, to admit the female sex.
More recently, a particularly poignant story is told by a 30-something year old, 6 foot 5 220# muscular lance corporal Marine by the name of Jeff Key, who served with distinction a gun toting tour of duty in Iraq in 2003. Coming out during a CNN broadcast, he was discharged from service, eventually becoming an activist against the Donīt Ask, Donīt Tell policy. His is one of many similar stories. While itīs true that the total number of discharges under the policy have declined since 911, (wonder why?)discharges and ruination of careers, no matter how irrational, do continue.
As military action goes forward in Iraqi and Afghanistan, all 25 members of the European Union (including macho-outback Australia) allow gay men and women to serve with honor in their military units. Examples abound regarding situations where gay soldiers from other nations and U.S. forces served together without problems of significance. One recent report details where an openly gay foreign officer commanded an integrated unit without incidence.
So why all the continued resistance? Why all the fuss? Well, there may be no single or simple response. But in part, I believe an answer can be gleamed from the likelihood that for US culture to admit gay men can be (and are) fit fighting machines and can make excellent soldiers, Marines, Air Force Officers and pilots might do too much damage to the prevailing "theory" of homosexuality so ingrained in the populace. Too many bullshit beliefs about the nature of homosexuality and gay people would suffer deflation if gays were openly admitted to the military and worse yet, on occasion proved themselves superior to their fellow military straight gals and buddies.
Like the old southern general who complained that to have successful black soldiers would dismantle the theory supporting slavery, to have successful gay military people would also kick a big hole in the gay stereotypes and force recognition that sexual orientation is something very separate from gender roles. That being gay is only about your sexual orientation not your skills, abilities or interests.
A similar line of subterranean and unspoken "logic" underpins just why so few gay men have been free to come out while involved in macho sports like professional football. We all know they are there. In some instances, they are superstars. But god forbid it was revealed they were gay. The whole macho, hyper-masculine stereotype would take a major hit and that simply cannot and will not (for some years to come) be abided.
Itīs OK for a gay man or woman to be a star figure skater or a renowned pianist - but please, just not a star quarterback or soldier of the year. Straight America seems to tremble at even the possibility.
Indeed the Southīs "theory of slavery" was greatly wrong - but it was only shortly after President Davisīs decree went into effect that the war was over. So, the proof of what was most feared by people like the complaining southern general was to be found mostly in the not infrequent instances of valiant behavior on the part of many northern freed blacks serving in the Union Army.
In reading this bit of American history, I was struck by the parallel that inherently seems to exist between the slave soldier question of the Confederacy (from 140 years ago!) and the contemporary debate over gay men and women serving openly in the armed forces. Nearly all the objections offered against gays in the military - ranging from the "problem of taking showers together" (a concern mostly to up-tight and fantasy proned straight men) - to questions of gays being reliable in battle - points often made by old indignant generals, arise directly or indirectly from the many culturally accepted stereotypes that abound about gays. If, as the stereotypes or "theory" goes, gay men are effeminate, limp-wrested, physically weak swishes only interested in Broadway musicals, Barbara Streisand CD collections, home decorating and Tupper-Ware parties ,then how on earth could they even manage to get through the physical and emotional rigors of basic training? Or so goes the thinking - if not the spoken words - of many of those objecting to gays serving in the military.
How many remember Sergeant Jose Zuniga? At age 23, Zuniga was named the Sixth Army's 1992 Soldier of the Year. He served as a medic in the gulf war. He was then discharged under "Donīt ask, Donīt tell" in 1993 for revealing his sexual orientation by attending the 1993 gay rights march on Washington. An event I too (together with several hundred thousand others)was fortunate to attend - with, I might add, less dire consequence to my career.
Sergeant Zuniga is not the only gay man to have served with honor. Gay men and women have been in the military serving with distinction ever since the Prussian military genius, Baron von Steuben, came to this country to drill and whip into shape the undisciplined Continental Army during the Revolutionary War. Gay women have also been serving with distinction ever since our armed forces finally saw fit, at the beginning of the 20th century, to admit the female sex.
More recently, a particularly poignant story is told by a 30-something year old, 6 foot 5 220# muscular lance corporal Marine by the name of Jeff Key, who served with distinction a gun toting tour of duty in Iraq in 2003. Coming out during a CNN broadcast, he was discharged from service, eventually becoming an activist against the Donīt Ask, Donīt Tell policy. His is one of many similar stories. While itīs true that the total number of discharges under the policy have declined since 911, (wonder why?)discharges and ruination of careers, no matter how irrational, do continue.
As military action goes forward in Iraqi and Afghanistan, all 25 members of the European Union (including macho-outback Australia) allow gay men and women to serve with honor in their military units. Examples abound regarding situations where gay soldiers from other nations and U.S. forces served together without problems of significance. One recent report details where an openly gay foreign officer commanded an integrated unit without incidence.
So why all the continued resistance? Why all the fuss? Well, there may be no single or simple response. But in part, I believe an answer can be gleamed from the likelihood that for US culture to admit gay men can be (and are) fit fighting machines and can make excellent soldiers, Marines, Air Force Officers and pilots might do too much damage to the prevailing "theory" of homosexuality so ingrained in the populace. Too many bullshit beliefs about the nature of homosexuality and gay people would suffer deflation if gays were openly admitted to the military and worse yet, on occasion proved themselves superior to their fellow military straight gals and buddies.
Like the old southern general who complained that to have successful black soldiers would dismantle the theory supporting slavery, to have successful gay military people would also kick a big hole in the gay stereotypes and force recognition that sexual orientation is something very separate from gender roles. That being gay is only about your sexual orientation not your skills, abilities or interests.
A similar line of subterranean and unspoken "logic" underpins just why so few gay men have been free to come out while involved in macho sports like professional football. We all know they are there. In some instances, they are superstars. But god forbid it was revealed they were gay. The whole macho, hyper-masculine stereotype would take a major hit and that simply cannot and will not (for some years to come) be abided.
Itīs OK for a gay man or woman to be a star figure skater or a renowned pianist - but please, just not a star quarterback or soldier of the year. Straight America seems to tremble at even the possibility.
Print
Email
