THE WILD BLUE YONDER
Jerry Harkins
When Bill Clinton was running for President in 1992, he promised among other things to allow gay people to serve in the armed forces. His argument was simple and compelling: America has no talent to waste. He felt so strongly about it that he promised to end the ban on the first day of his Presidency. There was no great uproar about the issue until after the election when panic set in among Christian conservatives and their strange bedfellows, the tonier classes of the Washington establishment. Senator Sam Nunn, a conservative Democrat, an Eagle Scout of Perry, Georgia, and the Chairman of the Armed Services Committee knew the way to the heart and mind of his fellow Southerner. “Billy,” he must have drawled, “you’re doing the right thing, of course, but we need some time to bring Congress on board. They’re decent folk but not as bright as you and me. Give me six months and we’ll get the job done right.” The President-elect was flattered to be considered a member of the same intellectual fraternity as the brainy Sam Nunn, so he caved and, over the next six months, Sam sandbagged him. There were two results. First, we got “Don’t ask, don’t tell” as the official policy of the United States. Second, Mr. Clinton learned a bitter but important lesson in the ways of Washington’s swamp dwellers. We might have learned a third thing: the United States military establishment is a textbook case of psychosexual confusion. But somehow that lesson never took.
Fast forward to May of 1997. The United States Air Force set out that month to court martial a young lieutenant named Kelly Flinn on charges of adultery and conduct unbecoming an officer and gentleman, charges involving a dishonorable discharge and 14 years at hard labor. Ms. Flinn was America’s only female B-52 pilot, having graduated from the Air Force Academy near the top of her class and having won all sorts of prestigious military awards in her brief career. She had grown up in Cobb County, Georgia and had been nominated to the Academy by none other than Sam Nunn. She also happened to be an attractive blond and had become a poster girl for Air Force recruiters. But she had to go. In addition to having a verboten affair with a married enlisted man, she was also publicly accused of wearing black pumps and a black lace camisole under her flight suit.
It wasn’t that the Air Force failed to notice that Ms. Flinn could no more act like a gentleman than an elephant could fly a B-52. Nor was it that the Air Force had adopted a post-cold-war mission of providing material for late night comedians even though the buffoonery of its spokespersons might have suggested to the contrary. And, finally, the Air Force, as an institution, was not so stupid as to think that its abhorrence of adultery was a wise policy. Some of its best and brightest were themselves notable adulterers and its chaplains were, one would hope, aware of the grand ambiguity of whatever it was that Jesus wrote about the adulteress in the sand. However, it ritualistically invoked the higher morality of the fox hole — the utter need for soldiers in combat to trust their buddies. Even as they repeated this mantra, they knew it was the same wimpy argument their predecessors had advanced against the integration of African-American soldiers in the 1950’s, female soldiers in the 1980’s and, as we have seen, gay soldiers in the 1990’s. Foxholes may long since have gone the way of buggy whips, but the generals still sing about caissons rolling along. And they still evince a delicate sympathy for the feelings of the bigots who serve under them.
In fact, Ms. Kelly had violated an actual provision of the Uniform Code of Military Justice against “fraternization” and had compounded her offense by essentially laughing at a written order requiring her to cease and desist. Laughing is the only possible reaction to the presumption that the law can prevent adultery. It is one more proof if needed of Mr. Bumble’s observation that “the law is a ass.” The underlying assertion that adultery is antithetical to good military discipline is equally foolish. As stated by the generals, it sounds plausible enough—how can you trust the guy in the next foxhole who’s been makng time with your wife?—but it can certainly be argued to the contrary:
All armies throughout history have included large numbers of adulterers. There is absolutely no evidence that successful armies have contained fewer adulterers than unsuccessful ones. Therefore, the belief that adultery adversely affects unit cohesion is a simple prejudice pretty much limited to present day American generals.
Of course, the generals do not really believe that adultery is bad for discipline. They have too much experience with their own weaknesses to think any such nonsense. The real offense of the military adulterer resides in breaking the law and not in the nature of adultery. In slightly different contexts, this is the last argument to which fools and kings (and occasionally parents) resort: “Because I say so.” By precisely this logic, the Inquisition had another female military officer, Joan of Arc, burned alive at the stake. Count your blessings, Kelly Flinn. Now certainly obeying orders is important, especially in combat, but there are exceptions. An order to break off a love affair is stupid and probably unlawful unless the Air Force has an overriding interest to the contrary. Otherwise, under the Fourth Amendment, one’s sex life is simply not subject to the whims of generals.
At the time, the head air force general was one Ronald R. Fogleman who testified before Congress that trust and integrity are crucial character traits in a person licensed to fly around in a B-52 loaded to the gills with nuclear weapons. Unfortunately, his argument lost some of its force when the general kept saying nuke-you-lar. All things considered, I’d just as soon have my bombs flown around by someone who can pronounce the English language. Of course, what goes around comes around. Not three weeks later, the goddess took her revenge on the Air Force.
On June 4, another of its four star heroes, a fellow named Joseph W. Ralston, was himself revealed as an adulterer. He had, it seems, been having an affair with a CIA employee. Unfortunately, this particular hero had been slated to become the next Chairperson of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Secretary of Defense William S. Cohen was reduced to pleading that his case was different because, among other things, it had not threatened morale and discipline. “It is,” he said, “time for a rule of reason rather than a rule of thumb.” The lovely Latin phrase res ipsa loquitur was coined for just such logic. Indeed, it speaks for itself and it says, does it not, that the rule applied to Kelly Flinn was only a rule of thumb. Joe’s wife caught him. He begged her forgiveness. She gave him another chance. He cheated again. Sound familiar? Sound like the kind of trust and integrity General Fogleman wants in folks flying his bombs? No matter. Ralston was not threatened with court martial. Rather, he was made Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs instead. At his confirmation hearings, Senator John W. Warner said, “Given the unusual circumstances of what happened, you and your wife and family handled that period in a commendable and professional manner.” Today, Ralston is a well paid employee of the Cohen Group. Yes, of course. The same Cohen.
As you can see, the Air Force has a lot more trouble with sex than you might think. Fighter pilots are widely thought to be among the planet’s most accomplished swordsmen, a sure symptom of low self esteem and sexual dysfunction. Shortly after the Flinn affair, it managed to compound its own embarrassment in the matter of Lieutenant William R. Kite, Jr. and his bride, former Airperson Rhonda Kutzer. The Lieutenant was being threatened with 14 years at hard labor for “fraternization” which, in this case, meant that a single officer met and married a single enlisted person. (Is there no end to the perfidy of warriors?) The only other place in the whole world where this is considered a crime is Baxter County, North Carolina, the fictional hometown of the late Jesse Helms. What is interesting about the Kite affair is the cast of characters which includes the Reverend Colonel Robert F. Ippolito who filed the original complaint against Kite. Father Ippolito was the base chaplain at Whiteman AFB. It is not clear just why he was so offended by something that normal young people normally do but, when your chaplain turns you in, you know you’re in trouble. There is also the unnamed Major who was Airperson Kutzer’s psychologist and who wound up testifying against her. The proceeding was organized by the base prosecutor, also unnamed, whose sense of humor and justice are neatly cojoined in the title of the newsletter he publishes, Nooseletter. If a sophomore came up with that, you’d think it was clever.
Why am I reciting all this history in the year of grace 2010? Because the patient is still a very sick chickadee. The military, especially the Air Force, still cannot come to grips with the problem of human sexuality. Now the issue is gays. This time, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs says he is for allowing gays to serve openly. His colleagues are horrified. Of course, as active duty officers, they have to be careful about what they say. General Merrill A. McPeak, however, is a retired Air Force Chief of Staff so he can say any damn fool thing he wants. His pulpit is the Op Ed page of The New York Times for March 5, 2010. His argument is the need for unit cohesion but he does not bother to explain it at all. Rather he sets up three strawman arguments for a new policy and proceeds to demolish them. Rule No. 1 in debate: don’t let your opponent construe your own arguments. But I can’t take issue with the General because my father always warned me against arguing cosmology with someone who thinks the moon is made of green cheese. What fascinates me is the man’s failure to take up the question of unit cohesion. Would gays in foxholes or cockpits (no pun intended) be as detrimental to winning wars as adulterers? General McPeak assumes it is and that the fact is obvious. He doesn’t bother to discuss it. It is obvious only to a homophobe.
You have to bear in mind the simplicity of the question. It has nothing to do with gays serving in the military. They do. There are lots of gays in uniform, an estimated 66,000 half of whom are on active duty, and, as in every other area of human endeavor, they do very well. As they say, “We’re here, we’re queer, get used to it.” It’s all perfectly legal as long as they stay in the closet (don’t tell). Unlike poor Kelly Flinn, the Air Forces is perfectly willing to tolerate a certain lapse of integrity in gay people who fly their bombs around but not in adulterers.
Among human resources researchers, there is no doubt that the unit cohesion argument is nonsense. One study by the Rand Corporation and the University of Florida concluded, “Serving with another service member who was gay or lesbian was not a significant factor that affected unit cohesion or readiness to fight.” In surveys of returning Iraq veterans, three-quarters say they felt “comfortable” or “very comfortable” in the presence of gays or lesbians. The generals should take a leaf from the notebook of Benjamin Disraeli who observed, “I must follow the people. Am I not their leader?”
