DADT vs. DOMA

-

On September 20th 2011, 18 years of institutional discrimination against lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgendered service people came to an end. Don't Ask Don't Tell (DADT) was passed during the Clinton administration as a "compromise" that allowed LGBTQ men and women to serve in the military, although not openly, and under constant threat of being "outted" and thus terminated.

In Charlotte Hooper's article Masculinities, IR and the ‘Gender Variable’, I was drawn to the sections in which she discusses how military combat has served to influence, and has been influenced by, constructions of masculinity within our culture; does the end to DADT signify a shift in prevailing norms about masculinity? Or are continuing inequalities, such as the ban on gay marriage, just cast in relief by this one positive step in public policy?

Hooper comments that the popular myth in our culture casts military service as the fullest expression of masculinity, as it is an enduring demonstration of men's "natural aggression" (479), as well as being explicitly tied to civic duty and fulfillment of the requirements of citizenship. She notes that, "Full citizenship rights are often denied to men who do not participate in defending the state, in much the same way as they have been for women" (481). Interestingly, in his remarks after signing the DADT repeal Act of 2010, President Obama acknowledged this fact when stating to LGBTQ service people:

"You've been asked to carry the added burden of secrecy and isolation. And all the while, you've put your lives on the line for the freedoms and privileges of citizenship that are not fully granted to you."

The reason I found this particular part of his speech so interesting was that the context in which he talked of the privileges of citizenship were explicitly in the public sphere. Indeed, he was not alluding to the ability to marry, adopt children, or a host of other "privileges" that belong to private sphere, but only to the "privilege" of serving one's country. With regards to the Defence of Mariage Act (DOMA), the President has been decidedly less activist, deciding not to repeal it, but has instead decided not to defend the statute. This kind of deliberate non-action for DOMA contrasted to the action taken in striking down DADT speaks volumes to the masculine norms which are held most sacred in our culture, particularly those that require both men and women to define themselves in the public sphere, and keep quiet about their private lives. A sentiment that is echoed by Republican Candidate Rick Santorum's in his comments during a televised debate that "any type of sexual activity has absolutely no place in the military".

I feel that Mr. Santorum's perspective feeds in to why DADT is taken more seriously than DOMA. It is directly related to what Cynthia Enloe is getting at when she points out that debate often centres around a "shrunken definition of what is political" (97) or what is an acceptable topic to broach in an arena full of "real issues" if one wants to be taken seriously. Topics such as marriage may be "too hot to handle" (Enloe, 95) for the Commander in Chief, as he cannot politically afford to be feminized by championing a "private" issue.

Going back to Hooper's argument, another reason for the more high profile nature of DADT over DOMA could be the particular importance that the military holds, both symbolically and practically, in society. Perhaps the military, as a particularly significant institution and bastion of hegemonic masculinity, has an interest in accepting service people's different gender identities so that the military's core beliefs and structure remain unchallenged. By celebrating DADT and ignoring DOMA, the government and the military embrace the gays and lesbians who most conform to and already perform institutionalized masculinity, while shunning those who seek to challenge gender roles in the private sphere. In this way, as Hooper suggests, masculinity is still reinforced by the system regardless of the gender of the soldier.

By choosing to legitimize LGBTQ soldiers but not LGBTQ husbands, wives, mothers and fathers, I find it hard to be sure that DADT doesn't further validate the preferences for masculine values and traits in society by effectively offering the LGBTQ community equality for the price of service, instead of granting them the "privileges of citizenship" that heterosexual couples enjoy and that Obama and others are so eager to point out. So, although I am fully supportive of its repeal and am glad to see that Obama has come through on one of a long list of promises, I remain skeptical that this constitutes any real shift in how gender is perceived, and won't hold my breath for DOMA's demise.

-E.

Works Cited:

Enloe, Cynthia. "III 'Gender' is not enough: the need for a feminist consciousness", International Affairs, 80:1 (2004): 95-97. Online.

Hooper, Charlotte. "Masculinities, IR and the 'gender variable': a cost benefit analysis for (sympathetic) gender sceptics", Review of International Studies, 25 (1999): 475-491. Online.

Obama, Barack. (2010, December). Remarks on Signing the Don't Ask, Don't Tell Repeal Act of 2010. Speech presented at the Department of the Interior, Washington D.C.