'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' online inbox goes live

News > 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' online inbox goes live

Photos


A new online inbox that enables servicemembers and their families to comment anonymously about the impact of a possible repeal of the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" law has gone live.
Download HiRes

'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' online inbox goes live

Posted 5/6/2010

Email story Print story

5/6/2010 - WASHINGTON (AFNS) -- A new online inbox that enables servicemembers and their families to comment anonymously about the impact of a possible repeal of the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" law has gone live.

The inbox will enable servicemembers and families to offer their thoughts about how a repeal of the law that prohibits gays and lesbians from openly serving in the military might affect military readiness, military effectiveness and unit cohesion, recruiting and retention, and family readiness, a defense official said.

Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates created an intradepartment, interservice working group to conduct a fair, objective, comprehensive and dispassionate review of these issues, the official said. The online inbox is one method the group will use to systematically engage with the force and their families.

A non-Defense Department contractor will monitor comments made through the inbox and eliminate any identifiable information inadvertently submitted to ensure anonymity, the official said.

The inbox is posted at http://www.defense.gov/dadt Respondents must possess an official Common Access Card to provide input.

(Courtesy of American Forces Press Service)

Comments

6/8/2010 12:46:12 PM ET
I think this is a very bad idea. Are we going to let the males and females shower together? Are males going to sleep in the same tents or housing with females? This is the same thing. I could shower and sleep in the same tent with twenty females and never touch any of them but it does not make them feel any less uncomfortable. All of us would be. I have also heard they are looking for ways of housing gay couples together. This is not for the federal government to decide. Most states do not recognize homosexual partnerships. This would be a way for the government to recognize it without going through congress. It is not how America works. Put a vote out to all military members past and present. If they vote to allow gays too openly serve then we let them serve. If they vote no then we drop the subject. After all it is the service members who will have to deal with the issue, not the politicians or professors at Berkley.

TSgt, Travis AFB

6/8/2010 10:48:10 AM ET
I think people should just get over the whole thing. What does it matter if you are gay or straight? I served with a few homosexuals in the desert and i would go back with them anytime. It should not matter your sexual orentationas long as you follow the rules and do your job. It might start some stuff in the offices but that's where the leadership gets involved and puts a stop to it.

SrA Cook, NV

6/7/2010 8:21:37 PM ET
I think we have a war to fight right now and the fact that we are worried about wether some one can serve openly gay is the last thing we need to worry about. The amount of money we are spending on this issue makes me sick. I think our Commander in Chief is just trying to win a popularity contest and get gay members' votes. Does he realy care about the impact it's going to have on the military? This issue can not be resolved in one year. Does anyone else feel the same way?

L. Wolf, Nellis AFB

6/7/2010 5:13:01 PM ET
Yes homosexuals are serving and will still be able to serve which is fine, but I am personally against the idea of repealing the don't ask don't tell. There would be more harm than good if this happens. Most don't go around telling people we are straight or what we prefer in the bedroom. Repealing Don't Ask Don't Tell would probably only make the workplace akward and uncomfortable for a good majority of the military population.

SSgt, MPLS

6/4/2010 5:47:48 PM ET
I don't think the repeal of Don't Ask Don't Tell is a problem. Gay and lesbian members of the Armed Forces simply need to be held to the same standard of conduct and professionalism as any other member of the Armed Forces in accordance with the Uniform Code of Military Justice. For example, a gay male unit commander should be given the same punishment for sexual harassment and abuse of authority involving his male subordinates as a non-gay male unit commander for sexual harassment and abuse of authority involving female subordinates. Everything ought to be conduct-based with no specific punishment or reward solely based on sexual orientation. I do not, however, support any form of Affirmative Action in which case gay and lesbian members of the military are given special treatment or quotas require that a certain percentage of leadership or other coveted positions be granted solely based on sexual orientation.

Capt Tarin Griswold, Peterson AFB CO

6/2/2010 8:49:03 PM ET
I served in both the Navy and Air Force and did my job to the best of my ability. Most of the honorable men and women I served with never made their sexual preference an issue, but based on a few indicators I suppose a few were lesbian, gay, perhaps bi-sexual. At first I was suspicious, but shortly after I started to get a life of my own, I didn't think much of it. Like me, a single black guy from the still segregated South in a job where there may have been 40-50 other blacks, I kept a low profile and they did too. But we demanded and gave each other respect due. DADT repeal will work fine in the Reserve. I left the Navy Reserve right after the policy became the law. But I was sitting at a round table group with a white admiral who was trying to gauge reaction to DADT in our community one day. Of course he tried to make the comparison of being a minority or a woman with being LGB. I told him the difference is pretty obvious when I walk into a well lit room. So, I wasn't buying it.

Gene, San Francisco

6/1/2010 2:48:57 PM ET
Are they going to have gay flights at basic training or are the trainees going to be subjected to gawking gay people. How is that going to promote squadron unity. The same goes for deployed locations. Don't ask don't tell is a perfect way for these people to serve without making other people uncomfortable and conserving unit cohesiveness.

T. Eagar, MInot AFB

5/26/2010 5:27:52 PM ET
I agree with J.R. from Texas how can family members provide input when they don't have CAC cards. Unfortunately it looks like leadership just wants to appear to care about what we think...And J.R. again points out that the inbox isn't anonymous if they require a CAC This article even points out that the contractor will only eliminate identifiable information that is inadvertently entered by the service member. How can we trust leadership to make decisions when they can't even set up an email inbox correctly

Janna, Dover DE

5/24/2010 12:34:59 PM ET
Amazing... everyone is blowing this out or proportion. I will solve all your problems with my incredible logic skills.Creeped out by them looking at you while you shower Talk to your commander chaplain SARC MEO whatever. Solved. Worried that they will get benefits No marriage allowed yet... but will as the states allow it. Worried they will 'put on lipstick and eyeshadow' Really Do I need to remind you of the standards That's pretty tasteless stereotyping.They can just serve like they have been serving for a while. Wrong they cannot engage in sexual contact heterosexuals can. If they are caught they are discharged. Many cases it is UOTHC because it is failure to obey an order. Don't even argue about people not being open about their heterosexuality that is a weak argument. Solved

WesB, SC

5/17/2010 5:12:05 PM ET
Benefits for partners is not an issue. There is no gay marriage on a federal level only in certain states. And that's where it stays on a state level. Which means gay couples can get state benefits but nothing on a federal level. So if a gay couple was married in Massachusettes it will not be recognized by the military therefore they will not be getting base housing Tricare retirement benefits etc.

Sue, Seattle

5/13/2010 6:18:29 PM ET
I agree with all points coming against getting rid of DADT Especially with the issue of benefits concerning Life Partners. Gays and Lesbians in the military aren't able to get housing on base because they are considered single so they shouldn't be allowed to get housing on base just like every other single person in the Military. I've grown up in a time where this issues with being gay or lesbian and wanting certain rights has become worse and worse. What I don't understand is this Why are people slowly trying to turn being gay or lesbian into some kind or minority race of people or some kind of religion to the point where they will need special benefits? Cause the whole of America to change for something that has nothing to do with the way people are created. They are in fact PEOPLE just like everyone else. Black white mexican whatever. We are all people. The military has certain rules and regulation to govern the PEOPLE in the military

Mikayla , Honolulu HI-Hickam AFB E-Club

5/13/2010 10:35:42 AM ET
...would be better served to find employment elsewhere... I love this comment. Having an opinion for or against ANY type of change and you should find another job. This comment shows up in almost every discussion on here. I personally don't care whether or not homosexuals serve in the armed forces and if they do I commend them on their decision to serve their country. For all of you self righteous find another line of work Kool-Aid drinkers You won't see me at your retirement eating cake and drinking Kool-Aid. Now back to looking for a decent civilian job...

Adios Air Force, Texas

5/13/2010 9:14:56 AM ET
And what if we allow gays to openly serve...whats next? Transgender, bisexual, etc.? Every sexual minoritiy is going to demand they get to have a right to express thier beliefs. Where does it stop?

Maj Sense, Florida

5/12/2010 2:23:49 PM ET
Actually, the issue of partner benefits has been brought up - in other threads on the subject. And, to me anyway, that is what changed my mind from agreeing with the repeal to disagreeing.

SSgt, Asheville NC

5/12/2010 1:20:45 PM ET
Here are some serious questions to be looked at that I've never heard addressed. If an openly gay or lesbian military member has a life partner, what benefits if any does he or she receive? Are they entitled to medical dental or base housing? What about retirement benefits? What if the couple separate or divorce, is the life partner entitled to benefits after they are no longer associated with the military member? What if they are stationed in a state that does not recognize gay rights? Would the Federal mil or gov card trump the states rights? I honestly could care less either way, but it is important for the fairness of all personnel, families and tax payers to look at these things and the implications that will come with them. The military is an easy target with the DADT policy; however, the entire military makes up less than 1 percent of the entire US population. There would have to be major new State and Federal laws to govern just the few topics I've brought up.

TSgt Isaacs, Creech AFB

5/11/2010 7:34:33 PM ET
Nobody is saying homosexuals cannot serve. They are allowed to serve now, they just can't tell anyone they are gay. We are not discriminating against anyone right now. THEY CAN SERVE AND ARE SERVING.

Sgt P, NAFB

5/11/2010 4:47:17 PM ET
I am going to go right to the heart of the problem and ask everyone a simple question. Why is it inappropriate to house the men and women in the same barracks? Why should it be tolerated for men interested in men and women interested in women to live together? There is no difference and this is morally wrong. The military would have to make major changes. Since this change I know of soldiers who have been hit on/flirted with by those of the same sex that they have to change around and live with. This is not ok.

JJ, CA

5/11/2010 1:41:57 PM ET
I believe everyone regardless of sexual orientation can perform the mission and I have no illusions that homosexuals have not been defending mother freedom from the beginning of time right along side heterosexuals. I do, however, offer this for thought. If the DADT policy is repealed, how then will living spaces...i.e., tents, showers and latrines be facilitated? If a person decides to be openly gay that is fine, BUT should I have to shower next to him? I am curious how all the thinkers in Washington will accomodate the grunts on ground scenarios that history has delineated based on gender. Simply repealing based on ideologies and doing the right thing may not be that easy.

MSgt JJ ret, Ohio

5/10/2010 8:15:14 AM ET
There are several people in our military who do not follow the same way of life. This what America was made from. Our beliefs and military training teach us we are all different but we must work together to defend our freedoms. Telling an American they can not fight for our country is wrong in many ways. This sends the message to all involved that their rights are still limited. Discrimination is cut and dried, you do not treat a person differently because of their choices such as religion. Life partners whether the same sex of different sex is a choice. As for it being in our military people make chocies everyday to do the right things at work. The problem people have with gays in our military is they are afraid of being asked out by someone of the same sex. If our military followed the rules on behavior this would not be an issue. Sexual harrasment can come from a man or a women, it is still sexual harrassment. A professional relationship is just that, professional.

MSgt Pam Lawson, Langley ARB

5/7/2010 5:52:49 PM ET
I agree with American Airman. It's convoluted and truly confused views such as D.Will's that is damaging the air force and making us look bad. Why would policies on dress and appearance change 34 countries allow everyone to serve openly...as opposed to the 16 that disallow non-straight members to serve... and how many of those men do you see wearing lipstick honestly now let's all think clearly for a second and holster our bigotry. I'm sure we can all manage to protect this country and do our jobs together.

Airman Monty, Holloman AFB

5/7/2010 5:13:19 PM ET
I honestly believe that as long as we keep all of our regulations the same as they are now as far as dress and appearance all the way down to military customs and courtesies there should be no issues with having the DADT abolished. The only thing I see as an issue is basic training and tech school. I believe that the DADT policy should be in full affect until an individual had completed all training requirements. That way the individual knows their job and what they are in the military for. If anything should be taken away from the military it is the right to smoke. It affects more people in the military then any homosexual ever would. More people die or have medical problems with smoking then being homosexual. The government would save more money on medical services and healthcare rates in the end if they made everyone who smokes quit and or not allow those who do smoke in.

B.B., colubmus

5/7/2010 4:42:38 PM ET
If they do repeal DODT will those people who morally object to the homosexual lifestyle be given a chance to get out of the service honorably. I don't have a problem with the person, I have a problem with what they are doing. Call me intolerant if you want, but if we do not draw the line somewhere, then what is next?

AJ, Texas

5/7/2010 3:48:22 PM ET
We all know that there have been homosexuals in the military for some time now. Under the current rules that is okay. It has always been homosexual conduct that is grounds for separation or discipline. Sexual orientation is the don't ask don't tell part. A good worker is a good worker...keep your private life private. What will really cheese me off is when a single military parent is held up on the waiting list for base housing because some Airman and his or her so-called life partner are taking up space, or when we start waiting for medical services at taxpayer expense behind a homosexual life partner.

Crusty Retiree, Texas

5/7/2010 2:47:57 PM ET
What D.Will is implying is pretty ridiculous. First off, being homosexual doesn't mean you're going to be throwing on makeup. Second, what makes you think such a thing would be allowed for homosexuals? The rules for males in uniform aren't going to change. A man isn't going to get away with wearing makeup to work regardless of his orientation. Simply granting homosexuals the ability to give honest answers when asked about their personal life is not even remotely close to throwing our dress and appearance standards out the window.

Aaron Steigerwalt, Altus OK

5/7/2010 1:43:29 PM ET
Wow D.Will...it really looks like you have an inflated view of yourself. It seems that you'd like to be a socially tolerant person but you just can't let the prejudice go. It's ridiculous statements like yours that really makes me sick. You're saying that all military standards will go out the window because of one policy change? Please get real...

American Airman, Ft Meade

5/7/2010 1:24:33 PM ET
Why does every homosexual have to be a transvestite too Barring someone from being able to serve based on sexual orientation is as valid as barring them based on race or gender. I could care less if you're into men or women...can you do the job? Paranoia and bigotry was rampant when the services integrated African Americans into their ranks i fear this will be very much the same yet in the end it will happen. Some people just can't get over their own personal bias and accept someone for who they truly are. This law is antiquated and I will applaud its repeal.

Brody, Sumter SC

5/7/2010 12:43:12 PM ET
I believe everyone should have a right to serve their country. Sexuality doesn't belong in the workplace - period. By assuming that every gay man is flamboyant and feminine and that every lesbian is butch we are feeding into the stereotypes that have plagued many groups of people. My only concern is that they know their job and are a quality worker just like everyone should be.

V. Snow, GA

5/7/2010 11:57:22 AM ET
Just imagine being on the front line and your wingman is a man wearing lipstick and eyeshadow? Give me a break. Allowing homosexuals to serve openly would not change military policy on uniform/appearance standards. Moreover, you should be judged by your work performance and how you serve, NOT what you do on YOUR time. A person's integrity, ability and intelligence isn't determined by their sexuality - period. It is the fear of the unknown and stereotypes that have keep oppressing people. If people feel the need to answer to a religious higher power, that is fine; however, I don't think we should have to answer to the government for our personal choicees that have no impact or bearing on duty. The military is the military, and it will not be more appealing because you won't get kicked out for being gay. Only those who want to serve will sign up, Nothing will change except for having to watch your every move and sentence. I don't expect a long line of cross-dressers signing up.

J. White, Charleston SC.

5/7/2010 11:49:43 AM ET
I find it a little ridiculous that people in military are so uncomfortable with allowing a group of people freedom to be who they are. I don't know about the rest of you, but one of the big reasons I wear this uniform is to allow ALL Americans to be free. I don't care if you're straight, bi or homosexual. All I care about is that you do your job well and have my back down range. Those two requirements have nothing to do with your sexual orientation. The AFI is set by gender, not sexual preference, so saying a man will be wearing lipstick and eye shadow on the frontline is ignorant. D. Will - just because you were raised in a closed-minded household doesn't mean everyone was. I bet the next thing you will want is for homosexuals to drink out of separate water fountains. Stop being such haters and let these people be who they are. Why should you have a say in how they live their life? They don't tell us we are wrong for being straight.

SSgt. TC, Hill AFB

5/7/2010 11:21:45 AM ET
Seriously - men wearing lipstick and eye shadow on the front line? We are still a military with rules regulations and standards those individuals not meeting those standards will be dealt with accordingly. We are the greatest military in the world yet we still discriminate against a class of individuals. Change is coming and those individuals not willing to change with the policy would be better served to find employment elsewhere.

KB, Colorado Springs

5/7/2010 9:44:00 AM ET
D.Will - the military has instructions and policies that establish standards for the daily appearance of every member in the military, so why would you think those same instructions and policies would change for gay members? Nothing would change. Flexibility should never be given when it comes to our standards. You wouldn't even know the person next to you is gay unless you asked them. I've served with gay members and only knew they were gay because they became close personal friends. I've also been surprised by some of the people I've served with who I would have bet 1M were straight or gay but turned out the other way.

SMSgt Bruce Morgan ret, Florida

5/7/2010 8:13:19 AM ET
Why is it that this seems to be the greatest topic of discussion in the AF today? This is just how I feel personally about this don't ask don't tell review. Do homosexuals have the right to serve...yes, but I personally don't believe that they should just be able to be openly out of that box. Why, because it is a negative reflection of the U.S. Military. Just imagine being on the front line and your wingman is a man wearing lipstick and eyeshadow. Does anyone think that is a good look? I don't believe so. Yes, it is a new day, but just because it's new doesn't mean we have to just go with the flow of the world because everyone knows it's wrong. I don't care who you are, you know you were not raised like that and you know it's wrong.If the military is going to change this...then I think the AF should get rid of WAPS testing and the AFI on hair restrictions. We men should just be able to wear a full beard and women should be able to shave their heads or wear their hair down..no rules.

D.Will, Langley AFB

5/6/2010 1:59:07 PM ET
I wonder why dependents can comment but there's no place to select retiree or civil service among the options. Aren't we being considered in the decision process Also since dependents don't necessarily have CAC cards how do they log in to comment And while I'm at it how honest do you think active duty people will be if they support the repeal but are required to ID themselves to comment It doesn't look this thing was very well thought out before it was launched.

J.R., Texas

Add a comment

Inside AF.mil

GeneralImagesVideo

View All RSS

Subscribe AF.MIL

More Headlines

Afghan air force improves casualty evacuation capability

F-35 ITF works toward night, weather certification

Commissaries plan for Mondays furlough  1

AF leaders remind force to be safe this summer  1

DOD firefighter certification program turns 20  1

Director details furlough plans for DOD schools

New under secretary visits Joint Base San Antonio

Hagel emphasizes summer safety in message to Department

Air Force leaders send Memorial Day message  2

KC-46A training, operational bases, alternatives selected  8

AF 7 Summits team scales Everest

Tinker AFB aircraft return to Oklahoma after diverting to Arizona   1

U.S. NORTHCOM aids Oklahoma tornado disaster relief efforts

First enlisted Airmen graduate from new Weapons School course

Commentary

Ordering monkey food 3

Only fools sit around wishing for good old days 23