Lesbian Cadet quits West Point, citing DADT

[Mongo]

And Michael Pollard discussed everything with his Company and Roommates? I don't think so. Forget the psychobabble. Enlisted Barracks, NCO Quarters, Hooches Ships at Sea and Bunkers are the same as Mother B. You all become family for a period of time. Not everything is shared. Some things are private and not discussed. Some are even in violation of the UCMJ.

Show me anywhere else in the military that 36 individuals spend 6-8 weeks together 24/7 followed by a year of 12 hours of liberty per week and then followed by the same 36 individuals spending the next three years in very close proximity and I might entertain your theory that it is the same as "Enlisted Barracks, NCO Quarters, Hooches Ships at Sea and Bunkers". Don't worry. Christcorp doesn't get it either.

 

[Luigi59]

And that's what the argument is all about. She could have simply left West Point. She isn't even required to say why. She could have left quietly and proclaimed her reasons after she left. But she chose to pursue the notoriety and publicity.

So your entire argument is "why" she left? You don't like her reason?

Answer me this:

Is she (or any other WP cadet, USAFA cadet, USNA Mid, or USCGA cadet) free to leave before their junior year, without incurring any financial or military obligation?

Of course, we know what the answer is - Yes, they are free to leave.

Is there any stipulation or binding contractual obligation to state "why" they are leaving? If the reason "isn't good enough" do they have to stay? Of course not.

Really when you come down to the bottom line, you aren't upset that she left, you are upset because she left and stated a reason that you do not agree with.

Taxpayer supported for 2 free years applies to EVERYONE, regardless of our own personal bias for or against a gay lifestyle.

If she quit because she disagreed with the policies of President Obama, you'd be OK with that?

If she quit because she realized she was in love with a man and wanted to get married, you'd be OK with that?

If she quit because she suddenly decided to change career professions from soldier to actress, you'd be OK with that?

So don't compare apples to oranges - she left before her junior year, which she had every right to do so, as does every single other cadet or mid - regardless of the reason, and regardless of whether we approve of her reason or not.

Every year, cadets and mids separate before they hit the "2 for 7" mark. Unless you want to change that law, she won't be the last.

But there is a policy in place, DADT, and until rescinded, it stands. In your argument, you are basically saying that a cadet or military member can disregard any policy that they don't think is right, and nothing should happen to them Doesn't matter what the policy is.

Using your words from above, think about this:

There is a policy in place, called "allowed to leave before junior year without incurring any obligation" and until rescinded, it stands. In your argument, you are basically saying that if the reason or leaving is homosexuality, it shouldn't apply and the policy should be disregarded if the cadet who is dropping out speaks publicly about why they left.

 

[Christcorp]

Don't worry mongo. I most definitely "Get It". I get that you have some holier than thou attitude that thinks the academy is some unique environment. Well, it isn't. And AF6872's correlation with enlisted is quite accurate. The same 40 individuals living together for 6 weeks; many of them going off to tech school together for up to a year; with the same restrictions concerning liberty. And then, getting their first assignment and living in a dormitory with maybe not the same individuals from basic, but with those that they will spend the next 2-3 years together with. (Unless they get married and move out). The correlation is quite similar.

But the cadet environment isn't as dramatic as you make it out to be. At least not in the air force. There will be approximately 30 cadets together; part of a 120 person squadron. They will indeed spend their 6 weeks of BCT together in close quarters. And when BCT is over, and they move into their real squadron, chances are that they won't even be room mates with one of the 30 that they spent the most time with in BCT. Then, after the first semester is over, they will change room mates again. Then, after the first year of the academy is over, they will move to a NEW SQUADRON, where they will get another new room mate and many new squadron members that they've never met. And while they will stay in that squadron for their 2nd/3rd/and 4th years, they will many times continue to change room mates. Many times because of the Squadron/Group/Wing type positions/jobs they will hold.

So while the military life is definitely unique in many ways, the academy is definitely not all that different and unique on it's own. You just don't understand reality. You want it to be different than it is.

 

[Mongo]

But the cadet environment isn't as dramatic as you make it out to be. At least not in the air force. There will be approximately 30 cadets together; part of a 120 person squadron. They will indeed spend their 6 weeks of BCT together in close quarters. And when BCT is over, and they move into their real squadron, chances are that they won't even be room mates with one of the 30 that they spent the most time with in BCT. Then, after the first semester is over, they will change room mates again. Then, after the first year of the academy is over, they will move to a NEW SQUADRON, where they will get another new room mate and many new squadron members that they've never met. And while they will stay in that squadron for their 2nd/3rd/and 4th years, they will many times continue to change room mates. Many times because of the Squadron/Group/Wing type positions/jobs they will hold.

LOL. Unless I am grossly mistaken, we are talking about WP here. I spent four years at a SA. Did you?

It's easy thinking you can lie to and deceive total strangers. Doing the same to your closest friends knowing you are definitely going to spend the next four years together is an entirely different matter.

 

[Christcorp]

No luigi, you are still mistaken. I am not upset at all that she is leaving. I am not upset at all for the reason she is leaving. I would not be upset at all for ANY REASON she or anyone else would want to leave prior to the beginning of the 3rd year. On all counts, you are mistaken.

My whole point is that it is quite obvious that she is USING a reason to leave, that in my opinion would NOT have been a issue with her at all, had she NOT been accepted to Yale and received the scholarship that she did. In other words, she had no real problem with the DADT policy; "No more than anyone else has with it". But because she has found a better option; she can "USE" the DADT policy as a reason, so as to not appear to have simply "Quit".

FWIW: The other scenarios that you used in your argument would have indeed been fine; as well as the DADT; if she had done so in May; In December after her 3rd semester; or any time in her first year. But ANY REASON for leaving; literally DAYS BEFORE COMMITMENT, is suspect in my opinion. She obviously was pursuing the Yale admittance for quite a while. It is not something she could pull of in the last 60 days. She was hanging onto the academy in case the Yale thing didn't pan out. If the DADT policy was indeed so disheartening to her, she should have had no reason not to quit in May, after semester. But she obviously wanted to make sure she had Yale lined up before CLAIMING that she had an incompatibility issue with the academy and military way of life. No matter WHAT her reason was, I would feel EXACTLY the same way as I do now, had all other things been equal.

 

[Christcorp]

LOL. Unless I am grossly mistaken, we are talking about WP here. I spent four years at a SA. Did you?

It's easy thinking you can lie to and deceive total strangers. Doing the same to your closest friends knowing you are definitely going to spend the next four years together is an entirely different matter.

Sorry, but all those individuals you went through BCT with, are not going to be your closest friends. That too is misleading. Maybe you spilled your guts of every deep, dark, secret that you ever had to all of the other cadets at west point. But I will bet my paycheck that not everyone of them divulged all of their deep, dark, secrets to you. But believe whatever you want. You definitely seem to live in a different world. And that world isn't west point.

 

[AF6872]

MONGO:

Didn't you watch "Band of Brothers" Proud to be included with Christcorp. The honor is mine. It doesn't take forty eight months to know the person in the next bunk. Sometimes it only takes about five minutes.

 

[LineInTheSand]

LOL. Unless I am grossly mistaken, we are talking about WP here. I spent four years at a SA. Did you?

Oh oh oh! I did. And you are mistaken.


On a side note, that general attitude is what makes the majority of non-Academy officers dislike West Point (when they do).

 

[scoutpilot]

Oh oh oh! I did. And you are mistaken.


On a side note, that general attitude is what makes the majority of non-Academy officers dislike West Point (when they do).

While I appreciate your deep insights on the Army, which are no doubt based on years of service in operational assignments with a multitude of Army officers, please try to take note of the fact that Mongo is a USNA grad. Thanks.

 

[LineInTheSand]

While I appreciate your deep insights on the Army, which are no doubt based on years of service in operational assignments with a multitude of Army officers, please try to take note of the fact that Mongo is a USNA grad. Thanks.

Oh, that makes even more sense! I thought he was West Point. That comment however was generated by a number of joint schools, which obviously have other commissioning sources, and comments from those officers, who yes, have years of service in operational assignments. I've heard that sentiment much more for Annapolis grads.

Only takes a few, the typical "you're not one of use, what do you know" to ruin if you everyone else.

 

[Mongo]

MONGO:
Didn't you watch "Band of Brothers"

AF6872, we are talking real world here, not some Hollywood make believe. Next thing we know, you will be telling us that your momma thinks “Life is like a box of chocolates.”

Sorry, but all those individuals you went through BCT with, are not going to be your closest friends. That too is misleading.

CC, no matter how many times you attempt it, just because you want something to be true doesn’t make it so.
I would venture a guess that if one were to poll the hundred thousand or so SA grads who are alive today and ask them the single most defining element of their life, most would tell you that it was their service academy experience. If the second question would be what makes this experience unique, most would tell you that it is the great friendships developed there. They will talk about being a part of the greatest fraternity in the world. They will talk about friends upon which they can depend for anything. They will talk about friends in whom they can place their total trust. Nothing comparable for boot camp grads. It’s just not the same. Nowhere near the same. Actually, the following is from the WP admissions website under the FAQ section:

What is your favorite aspect of the West Point experience?

A. My favorite aspect of the West Point Experience is the camaraderie among Cadets in the Corps and being a part of the great traditions and associated with the great graduates of the Academy. (2010)
A. The friendships you forge, especially during CBT (Cadet Basic Training). You go through so much with your CBT platoon, and its great when you are able to get back together with them and recount all the stupid, funny, and life-changing stories. You learn to put so much trust in the people around you during CBT, and that trust leads to some amazing friendships. (2011)
A. The people we meet. Everyone is so unique and with so many backgrounds a cadet dives into a pool of different cultures and personalities. Getting to know the roommates and company mates is a fulfilling experience. (2011)
A. The best part about West Point is the friendships that you develop throughout the experience. You make friends you know you could count on any time. (2011)
A. Being a part of a fraternity. I'll be just walking along, and some random upperclassmen will stop me and ask me about my day. I've never been a part of an organization like that, and it's a wonderful feeling to know that no matter what, someone is always looking out for you. (2013)

These feelings are universal. Not the type of friend one would lie to.

I have been in AF6872’s “Hooches, Ships at Sea, and Bunkers” and they don’t hold a candle to Mother B. “Friends you know you could count on any time” is so very true. Back to scout pilot’s question as to how often I have sex with my wife. I can only think of five people to whom I would answer that question without hesitation, without asking ‘why do you want to know?‘. One is my doctor. Three of the other four are company classmates. Company classmates to whom after a few years, the thought of being dishonest with suddenly becomes inconceivable.

 

[usna1985]

The subject of this thread is the article about the acknowledged lesbian who quite USMA citing DADT. If you want to discuss other subjects, such as superiority exhibited by certain SA grads, start a new thread, move it to the Off Topic board, or discuss it via PM.

If you're done with the topic of this thread, then move on.

Thank you.

Your friendly mod.

 

[Christcorp]

Mongo, you are arguing a point that I have not disagreed with. All your comments about the academy, people's experiences, the bonds that are formed, closer than even many fraternal/maternal families, etc... I agree 100%. That is very real. But at the academy and in all facets of the military, whether enlisted, ROTC, OTS, or the academy. My disagreement is that you continue to make your statements as all inclusive. In other words: ALL cadets are this close to each other. ALL cadets share ALL their private information with each other. This is simply not true. And I don't believe it was true 40 years ago when you went to the Naval Academy. There are many private things that cadets, officers, and enlisted keep to themselves.

And that's what this subject is about. A west point cadet, who is basically saying that while the military had a policy that they wouldn't officially ask her about her sexuality, that she felt that she couldn't live by this policy. That she wanted to be able to proclaim publicly her sexuality. And I am very confident in saying that even 40 years ago, you had a classmate that held back secrets from you too. And it's possible that there was a gay mid that you didn't know about.

However, my debate, argument, discussion, or whatever you'd like to consider it, has absolutely nothing to do with the DADT policy or with this west point cadet deciding that she no longer wanted to continue at west point. Those are individual points and actions. If you want to concentrate on the DADT "Portion" or her "living a lie" portion, then start your own thread. My position is about taking all of this cadet's individual points and actions, KEEPING them all together in context with the article posting in this thread, and noticing a very curious pattern.

The pattern that I see, is that the DADT policy is simply being used as an excuse, because she's been offered a "Better Deal" (for her) from Yale, and she doesn't want to appear to be a quitter or that Yale is not what she truly wanted. She wants to be seen as a victim.

When you combine she obviously had to apply to Yale some time ago; (Even with fast track for minority, gay, and other reasons, it still takes time to get accepted); she also applied for a gay related scholarship, which also takes time; she arrange a letter of recommendation from one of her academy professors (Which you don't just walk in an say: will you sign this); that the "REASON" of DADT wasn't enough for her to quit earlier in the last 2 years; and finally, that she did quit within days of commitment (When you consider that she's basically had the summer with less stress of the environment she was complaining about; it is quite easy to draw a particular conclusion.

My Conclusion: In her mind, West Point was OK, but it wasn't what she really wanted. (Nothing wrong with this). Being gay, she knew what the policy was. She accepted this prior to coming in. (Maybe it was getting more difficult for her to handle the policy - I'll give her that benefit of the doubt). No matter what, she was able to put up with the policy. (Especially knowing that the policy is under review). She was looking at other options. (Yale and scholarships). She definitely preferred Yale or another option. (Again, nothing wrong with this). She was keeping West Point as her backup/existing choice in case Yale or other options didn't pan out. (This is where I start questioning). Yale came through, along with the scholarship. (Nothing wrong with this). But to save face, and not appear to be a quitter, she states that the ONLY reason she is leaving is because of the DADT policy. And that if they were to rescind that policy in the next 6 months, that she would reapply for West Point in 2011. (This isn't in any way conceivably possible. She is saying this to convince people that she's not a quitter, that West Point is her #1 choice, and without the DADT policy, she'd be staying)/ This is the "Impossible Finite Argument" I spoke of. When you create a scenario that is impossible to exist, so that your argument or position can not be disproved.

She has no intention of coming back to West Point. West Point most likely was not her first choice 2 years ago. She's been looking into other options, such as Yale, for a long time now. There is absolutely NOTHING WRONG with this. And now that she has been accepted to yale, with a scholarship, she could have simply left West Point and fulfilled her dreams. But instead, she is using DADT as an excuse for her leaving. She's playing the victim card and trying to get people to feel sorry for her. That there is no way she'd leave West point if DADT wasn't there. She gets the media involved and entertains publicity and notoriety. She's looking for her 15 minutes of fame and to make a political/social statement. You break down every action in this story, and there doesn't appear to be anything wrong. Sort of like looking at individual trees. But when you leave ALL the actions, decisions, choices, possibilities, options, etc... together, and look at the entire Forest instead of the trees, it is quite easy to see a totally different motive here. When you look at all the choices she had, all the decisions she made compared to what she could have made; there is no doubt in my mind that she is not a "Victim' in all of this.

 

[Mongo]

She has no intention of coming back to West Point. West Point most likely was not her first choice 2 years ago. She's been looking into other options, such as Yale, for a long time now. There is absolutely NOTHING WRONG with this. And now that she has been accepted to yale, with a scholarship, she could have simply left West Point and fulfilled her dreams. But instead, she is using DADT as an excuse for her leaving. She's playing the victim card and trying to get people to feel sorry for her. That there is no way she'd leave West point if DADT wasn't there. She gets the media involved and entertains publicity and notoriety. She's looking for her 15 minutes of fame and to make a political/social statement. You break down every action in this story, and there doesn't appear to be anything wrong. Sort of like looking at individual trees. But when you leave ALL the actions, decisions, choices, possibilities, options, etc... together, and look at the entire Forest instead of the trees, it is quite easy to see a totally different motive here. When you look at all the choices she had, all the decisions she made compared to what she could have made; there is no doubt in my mind that she is not a "Victim' in all of this.

I think we are going to have to disagree. One does not remain number nine in her class by sliding along on their second choice waiting for something better to come along. Sure, the academics are a given. However, why would one succeed in the level of military professionalism necessary to maintain her class standing if they were just biding time? Her blogs indicate she began looking around for other alternatives this past spring. She decided this summer. She may have been forced to complete summer training before she could resign. That is the policy for at least some of the SA s. Complete the spring semester and you are forced to wait until the reforming in the fall to resign.

You see my arguments as parallel to the discussion and probably best suited for another discussion. I see them as the very heart of this particular situation.

A gay individuals wishes to serve their country in the military. They desire to attend a service academy. They do their research and find that the DADT policy has existed for the last 15 years or so and that it is apparently the avenue to their service. What they don’t realize is that DADT is diametrically opposed to the honor concept in which they will be instilled. Sure, a sea lawyer can rationalize and figure a way around it. Hoever, in fact, it is indeed institutionalized deception. It is fine to serve. Just don’t tell the truth. The issue is that it goes against the very grain of true honor. Mandatory deception is not honorable. This is her first hurdle, her first indication that perhaps things are not well. Then she bonds with her classmates. . What was once a nameless face has now become the closest friend one has ever had. Her second hurdle. Deception. Honor. Friendship. Water and oil. They just don’t mix. The individual was indeed set up to an impossible task. Young people see things in black and white. She was set up to fail. She has a right to be upset. Let her have her 15 minutes of fame as you put it. It won’t hurt anyone and it may prevent another from making the same mistake.

My one aside which might be the subject of another thread. Officers stand for honor and integrity. How will their shipmates react the day after DADT is repealed and they find out they have been lied to for the past ten years? I would think that their honor and integrity will probably suffer a notch or two. This has got to be in the back of the mind of all those who are serving now under DADT. I could definitely applaud the honor and integrity of someone who resigned under this policy and then become reinstated after it is repealed. Their honor would remain intact. Just another example of how it is a horrible law.

 

[LineInTheSand]

I guess we'll see.

 

[AF6872]

Thought I would save you some time. Read the book then

 

[raimius]

My one aside which might be the subject of another thread. Officers stand for honor and integrity. How will their shipmates react the day after DADT is repealed and they find out they have been lied to for the past ten years? I would think that their honor and integrity will probably suffer a notch or two. This has got to be in the back of the mind of all those who are serving now under DADT. I could definitely applaud the honor and integrity of someone who resigned under this policy and then become reinstated after it is repealed. Their honor would remain intact. Just another example of how it is a horrible law.

What lie?

The point of not asking or telling is to avoid both separation and lies. People can assume whatever they want, but under DADT lying is not required.

 

[Farleigh85]

A gay individuals wishes to serve their country in the military. They desire to attend a service academy. They do their research and find that the DADT policy has existed for the last 15 years or so and that it is apparently the avenue to their service. What they don’t realize is that DADT is diametrically opposed to the honor concept in which they will be instilled. .

Nonsense. Military service is incompatible with a whole constellation of desires and behaviors that one must suppress to serve effectively. Suppressing those desires and behaviors is not an act of dishonesty. It is an act of maturity, discipline and--yes--honor. It seems to me that about ten years ago the judge advocate general of the Air Force was forced to resign in dishonor for having consensual unprofessional relationships with several women. He was an attorney and so could have easily tried to defend himself by saying, "Serial intimate dalliances with women is something that is just part of my nature. It is who I am and who I have always been. When I acted in conformance with these desires, I was at long last being honest with myself. Sadly, I was forced to cover up these relationships to keep my commission. I was forced to lie about who I really am. I have been victimized by an intolerant military system. I demand justice." No, he wasn't that foolish.

I know another fellow who got kicked out of the Army after just two years because he had a hard time following orders. As he explained it to me, "I always question orders. It's my makeup. I've been that way since I was a kid. I'm not violent or rude about it. And I always have good reasons for questioning orders." Had he suppressed that inclination, would he have been acting dishonorably because it was counter to who he "was"?

I don't think so.

 

[Pima]

My one aside which might be the subject of another thread. Officers stand for honor and integrity. How will their shipmates react the day after DADT is repealed and they find out they have been lied to for the past ten years? I would think that their honor and integrity will probably suffer a notch or two. This has got to be in the back of the mind of all those who are serving now under DADT.

Why would it suffer? It is DADT. Nobody in their right mind would believe there aren't homosexuals within the military. The ones that announce the next day, would not suffer honor or integrity because they agreed to accept the terms if you are a homosexual you Don't Tell. This is a fact they accepted when they signed on. That is the grievance for many people. It is the fact you knew you could not openly serve, but now you want to change the conditions of the game, and if not then you want to take your toys and leave. Heck, 19 yo in Afghanistan knew they could go to a war zone, but what they imagined is probably not what they are living. SHould they get to say buh-bye because reality didn't meet their expectations?

Additionally, Bullet and I have known several officers who decided to leave the service by announcing they were homosexuals, and not one was an OMG moment I never thought that. C'mon, in the flying world, you may spend your career moving to 1 of 4 bases, by the time a guy is an LTC and you have known them since they were an Lt., while the entire time they never had a relationship at all, you can put 2 + 2 together without using a calculator to come to an answer. Now that maybe stereotyping, but I don't know many men over the age of 35 that never had one long term relationship where they didn't introduce their partner...be it homosexual or heterosexual.

 

[Christcorp]

Mongo; she indeed do well at the academy, but her being #9 at West Point in her class, doesn't mean West Point indeed was her 1st choice and life long ambition. I can't speak for West Point, but at Air Force, there is "GPA" and "OPA". And you are ranked separately. Your GPA contributes to the OPA. It didn't say in the article if she was #9 academically or #9 OPA. OPA includes the GPA, Physical Fitness, and Military studies/duties/etc... Suffice it to say, that she did well at west point. But I have known many who were outstanding academically, and still decided to leave the academy. It just wasn't for them. So her being #9 in her class, has no bearing on whether or not she really wants/wanted West Point. It simply means she's a really good student. Which many of them are.