This paper is a response to Schumm's 2004 critique of Belkin's 2003 article, dealing with the “Don't Ask, Don't Tell” policy in the U.S. military. Schumm's critique specified four reasons for continuing to exclude homosexuals from military service: military effectiveness, sexual asymmetries, Christian soldiers' dilemma of “living a lie” and skewed opinions of policy makers and military elites. Each of these categories is analyzed and discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Andersen-BoersM.Van Der MeulenJ. (1994) Homosexuality and the armed forces in the Netherlands. In ScottW. J.StanleyS. C. (Eds.), Gays and lesbians in the military: Issues, concerns and contrasts. New York: Aldine De Gruyter. Pp. 205–229.
2.
BelkinA. (2003) Don't ask, don't tell: Is the gay ban based on military necessity?Parameters, XXXIII, 108–119.
3.
GatesG. (2004) Gay men and lesbians in the U.S. military: Estimates from Census 2000. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute.
4.
MillerL. (1997) Not just weapons of the weak: Gender harassment as a form of protest for Army men. Social Psychology Quarterly, 60, 32–51.
5.
MillerL.WilliamsJ. (2001) Do military policies on gender and sexuality undermine combat effectiveness? In FeaverP. D.KohnR. H. (Eds.), Soldiers and civilians: The civil-military gap and American national security. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Pp. 386–429.
6.
MoskosC.ButlerJ. (1996) All that we can be: Black leadership and racial integration the Army way. New York: Basic Books.
7.
ParkR. (1994) Opening the Canadian forces to gays and lesbians: An inevitable decision but improbable reconfiguration. In ScottW. J.StanleyS. C. (Eds.), Gays and lesbians in the military: Issues, concerns and contrasts. New York: Aldine De Gruyter. Pp. 165–179.
8.
SchummW. (2004) A reply to Belkin's argument that ending the “gay ban” will not influence military performance. Psychological Reports, 95, 637–640.
