Don't Ask Don't Tell

You are right, I am passionate about this

The OP asked:


MemberLG,

So as I zip my lips, lock it with a key throw the key away and remain silent
answer the OP.

Remove me, talk to the OP. Guide them.

My two cents on the original question

I know on September 20th "Don't Ask Don't Tell" was repealed, but I was wondering how it is being implemented at the Academy. Are they counting it as violating the honor code if they don't tell? Are they being hazed? Accepted?

If a homosexual cadet doesn't "tell" there should be no honor violation. The new policy is that things will sexual orientation neutral. There is no policy requiring service members to declare their sexual preference. If a cadet is asked about his sexual orientation, if could be answered or could be "none of your business." However, if a homosexual cadet is asked the question and for whatever reason lied about it, he or she committed an honor violation.

No clue on any open homosexual cadets are being hazed or accepted - this for a curret cadet to answer, not an old grad like me. As for hazing, it won't be tolerated. As for acceptance, not sure what OP is asking. Perhaps it's a generation gap, if I found out one of my friends is a gay am I supposed to do something different to "accept" him?
 
However, if a homosexual cadet is asked the question and for whatever reason lied about it, he or she committed an honor violation.

A gay cadet being asked "Are you gay" and answering "no" can still be kicked out?

You're saying that a cadet can be kicked out for not "coming out" and admitting to be gay? (Assuming an honor violation is enough to be disenrolled).

That doesn't sound like it's in compliance with the elimination of DADT.

In fact, that doesn't sound much different from DADT, except now you CAN ask.

And wouldn't an answer of "none of your business" fall under the West Point definition of lying?

LYING: Cadets violate the Honor Code by lying if they deliberately deceive another by stating an untruth or by any direct form of communication to include the telling of a partial truth and the vague or ambiguous use of information or language with the intent to deceive or mislead.
 
A gay cadet being asked "Are you gay" and answering "no" can still be kicked out?

Yes, if he committed an honor violation.

You're saying that a cadet can be kicked out for not "coming out" and admitting to be gay? (Assuming an honor violation is enough to be disenrolled).

No. The new policy/gudiance is that things will be sexual orientation neutral. So, no requirement to disclose one's sexual orientation. Cannot make the connection - a cadet should not kicked out fo not "coming out" PERIOD. A cadet should not be kicked out for admitting to be a gay PERIOD. However, a cadet can be kicked out via honor code for lying about his or sexual orientation.



That doesn't sound like it's in compliance with the elimination of DADT.

In fact, that doesn't sound much different from DADT, except now you CAN ask.

It is in compliance and I will give some credit to DoD for the new gudiance. The previous ask provision was important because being a known homosexual got you separated from the military. Now with things being sexual orientation neutral, I can't think of any good reason for a commander to ask about sexula orientation.

My belief is eveyone has to fight for what they believe in. So if you are a gay cadet/midshipman that wants to hide your sexual orientation there are consequences. Yes, there might be some insitutitional bias/discrimination if a military member reveals that he is a gay, but the only way to fight that is by standing up for your rights not some system or more policies.

And wouldn't an answer of "none of your business" fall under the West Point definition of lying?

No, why is it lying? If someone ask you how many sexual partners you had and you answer "none of your business," is that lying.
 
Yes, if he committed an honor violation.

So is a gay cadet, in answering "no" to the question "Are you gay" committing an honor violation for not revealing that he is gay? You are stating that yes, it is an honor violation to fail to admit to being gay if you are gay.

Which may force a gay cadet who wishes to remain "in the closet" to disclose rather than commit an honor violation.

MemberLG said:
I can't think of any good reason for a commander to ask about sexula orientation.

I agree, but you opened up the scenario with this post:
MemberLG said:
However, if a homosexual cadet is asked the question and for whatever reason lied about it, he or she committed an honor violation.

Which is why I asked the question.

MemberLG said:
My belief is eveyone has to fight for what they believe in. So if you are a gay cadet/midshipman that wants to hide your sexual orientation there are consequences. Yes, there might be some insitutitional bias/discrimination if a military member reveals that he is a gay, but the only way to fight that is by standing up for your rights not some system or more policies.

Which seems to enforce my earlier statement that if you are gay and don't admit it, you risk being bagged for an honor violation for not admitting your sexuality.

MemberLG said:
No, why is it lying? If someone ask you how many sexual partners you had and you answer "none of your business," is that lying.

It would seem that when asked a direct question that can be answered with a direct "yes" or "no" and the response is an ambiguous "none of your business" such a response would meet the definition of lying printed above.
 
I can't think of any good reason for a commander to ask about sexula orientation.

If someone ask you how many sexual partners you had and you answer "none of your business," is that lying.
I don't think it will be the commanders who will raise the issue, but contemporaries. No one took exception to the earlier descriptions of what goes on in a barracks when everyone lives together. My earlier hypothetical situation seems very real and we all know that in many circles, including a group of young adults, that a "none of your business" is tantamount go guilt. I agree with Luigi, nothing has changed.
 
It would seem that when asked a direct question that can be answered with a direct "yes" or "no" and the response is an ambiguous "none of your business" such a response would meet the definition of lying printed above.

What is ambiguous about "none of your business"? You are not fudging the answer about whether you are or are not gay you are making a clear statement that your sexual orientation is of no relevence to the person asking the question. There are any number of very personal questions related to peoples private lives that they would be fully within thier rights to answer in exactly the same way.

Also it seems to me that we have to recognise that (while Lady Gaga may want us to beleive it is all as simple as being born a certain way) people experience thier sexual orientation in differnt ways at different points in their lives, some people come out very early, some late, some people will know they are gay just because they do, some will not recognise it until they actually fall in love with a person of the same sex. A person could be asked if they are gay and answer no and then some time later have it shown that they are gay it does not mean that the answer was not true even in their own minds when they gave it...
 
It would seem that when asked a direct question that can be answered with a direct "yes" or "no" and the response is an ambiguous "none of your business" such a response would meet the definition of lying printed above.

Simple answer is no. It depends on the question itself, but answering the question of what is your sexuality with "none of your business" is not an honor violation. I could give you many examples

"Did you vote for Obama" - I don't want to answer it

"Do you like Jane" - I don't want to answer it

"Do you like Joe" - I don't want to answer it
 
Simple answer is no. It depends on the question itself, but answering the question of what is your sexuality with "none of your business" is not an honor violation. I could give you many examples

"Did you vote for Obama" - I don't want to answer it

"Do you like Jane" - I don't want to answer it

"Do you like Joe" - I don't want to answer it

As a former member of the honor committee (the cadets who administer the honor system) I can assure you that MemberLG is 100% right. Declining to answer a question is not an honor violation.

One thing to remember is that honor code is a living, breathing entity that is administered by intelligent people. While it's easy to look up the honor code online and decide you know what it means, it's actually a very nuanced idea that requires a lot of experience and understansing. That's one of the reasons cadets receive honor training right up until they graduate. It's not a simple idea or a simple way to live one's life.

In general, questions of a truly private nature fall into the "social tact" category. There are recognized subjects which may require ambiguous or "tactful" answers for reasons of politeness, propriety, or personal privacy. Sexual questions have long been recognized to fall into that category. The classic example we always used is that if you go to an officer's house for dinner and his wife can't cook to save her life, it's not a lie to tell her that her food was wonderful and that you'd love seconds. If a cadet asks a female cadet whether she likes performing lewd acts on her boyfriend, she's under no obligation to answer that question truthfully, either. Though she probably is under an obligation to slug that guy.

There are many nooks and crannies and "what if" situations when it comes to the honor code. That's why it's administered as a process of education, training, investigation, and oversight. Rest assured that the Academy recognizes the sensitive nature of many subjects and will incorporate these changes into cadets' understanding and application of the honor code.
 
As a former member of the honor committee (the cadets who administer the honor system) I can assure you that MemberLG is 100% right. Declining to answer a question is not an honor violation.

Accepted.

However, his other scenario is the one more troubling.

When a cadet is asked "Are you gay" and they answer "no" (for obvious reasons stated by Mongo) instead of "none of your business" and they are indeed gay (choosing not to reveal it i.e. "stay in the closet") have they committed an honor violation?

MemberLG says yes, they have committed an honor violation. In his example, to answer with a "none of your business" is fine, but to say "no" when in fact the opposite is true, is a lie and an honor violation.

If that is true, then in reality nothing has changed, and cadets will brought up on honor violations if they don't come out of the closet whenever asked about their sexual preference.
 
In general, questions of a truly private nature fall into the "social tact" category. There are recognized subjects which may require ambiguous or "tactful" answers for reasons of politeness, propriety, or personal privacy. Sexual questions have long been recognized to fall into that category.
So back to my hypothetical question. The annual end of cow year roommate shuffle. Rumor is that CADET 'B' is gay. He asks Cadet 'A' if he wants to room together the following year. Cadet 'A' asks if he is gay. Cadet 'B' is in dire straits. Most of his classmates have turned him down. The remaining, except for Cadet 'A', are ****** bags. Cadet 'B' may think the rumor of his gayness might be why no one wants to room with him. In reality, it is because he only changes socks and takes a shower on 'B' Week Thursdays. Knowing that a "It's none of your business" is tantamount to a "yes", if he answers "no' and Cadet 'A' subsequently discovers that Cadet 'B' has had a sexual relation with his boyfriend for the past three years, what are the ramifications?

Can Cadet 'A' legitimately ask the question?

Would this fall under the above "social tact" exclusion?

Was an honor offense committed?
 
Sorry I'm coming late to this party! I have to say that as I read the thread, almost everything I wanted to say was already said by MemberLG and I agree with/support everything he's said, both from my time at WP and what I know from current cadets/parents. Some points:

The AFA has implemented now that doors must remain open, but that is it.

Are you sure on this? My son told me the opposite - that to be "fair" they could now close doors with a female in the room, which was prohibited in the past.

An honor code violation will get you separated, a reg violation might get you separated. I never said hazing has no impact on honor.

Not all hazing are bad (I will qualify "hazing" as yelling aloud, invading someone's personal space, uniform drills (i.e. change into Dress Gray in five minutes, change into you PT uniform, and etc). Too my surprise, I was a big hazer when I was a summer cadre at West Point for new cadets. Many of my friends were surprised as I was a very nice person :smile: A part of my responsibilities as a cadre was to get them ready for the academic year. I could have been nice to new cadets, but if I did I would not have them be prepared for likely hazing experience they will face during the academic year.

Agree with this whole statement and the clarification on hazing, which is kind of a uniquely WP word and doesn't have the same connotations as it might at a civilian college frat or a school like VMI. It was simply used to mean being yelled at or having someone get in your face or make you do stupid stuff, which certainly wouldn't get the person doing it thrown out. Kind of like AF's current "we were beat by someone" meaning dropped for pushups, hazing was an everyday WP word when I was there at least.

Are we at the point we argue regulation over honor? If so that is sad.

I've also gone into the regs vs honor argument many times with other USAFA parents. Pima, honestly, have you never exceeded the speed limit or run a stop sign? Those would all be considered equivalent to many of the "regs" at WP, which are simply rules - some far more stupid than others. In the civilian world obviously there's a huge difference between not coming to a full stop and committing murder. Same in the world of regs at an academy. Failing to turn in a homework assignment would be a regs violation that would get you a slap on the wrist or a lower grade. Driving off base when not permitting and getting a DUI after hitting another car and putting someone in the hospital would get you thrown out (if not into jail). But neither would have anything to do with honor.

I think the difference is that there aren't levels in honor like there are in regs. For honor, it doesn't matter how serious the offense is, it matters that the offense occurred (at least while I was there - I realize now there are things like honor probation and remediation, etc. - let's not even go there. :rolleyes:). If you copied one answer on an ungraded homework assignment from a roommate and didn't acknowledge it that would be as much of an honor violation as getting all the answers to the final exam in advance.

Yes, if he committed an honor violation.

However, a cadet can be kicked out via honor code for lying about his or sexual orientation.

No, why is it lying? If someone ask you how many sexual partners you had and you answer "none of your business," is that lying.

Cut and pasted parts of this answer, but I fully agree with it. I still remember coming back from my first weekend away with my boyfriend at WP (now my husband of 23 years :wink: ) and being asked by my roommates if we'd slept together and being very uncomfortable answering that question (being raised in a strict Catholic family!). Saying "none of your business" would have been fine. Saying no, if I did in fact sleep with him would have been an honor violation - even though there was nothing "wrong" (in the Army's eyes) with having done so.

So is a gay cadet, in answering "no" to the question "Are you gay" committing an honor violation for not revealing that he is gay?

I agree, but you opened up the scenario with this post:

Which is why I asked the question..

Mongo phrased the question first, not MemberLG. He was just answering it from the WP perspective.

Luigi - really, you're an academy grad and haven't figured out how to avoid the direct question? :confused: (At least in the case of peers as we're talking about in this scenario). One of my favorite quotes - "Honor was a microscope. It could also be a guillotine." (Name the book - anyone? :biggrin: ).

I just don't see the difference between this and Scout's example above about a female being asked about a lewd act or something similar. I was asked a lot of inappropriate questions like that during my time in the Army, and it's certainly not hard to turn it into a joke and/or avoid the question. I would agree that answering no to the question, when you KNEW you were gay, would be an honor violation. Period.
 
So back to my hypothetical question. The annual end of cow year roommate shuffle. Rumor is that CADET 'B' is gay. He asks Cadet 'A' if he wants to room together the following year. Cadet 'A' asks if he is gay. Cadet 'B' is in dire straits. Most of his classmates have turned him down. The remaining, except for Cadet 'A', are ****** bags. Cadet 'B' may think the rumor of his gayness might be why no one wants to room with him. In reality, it is because he only changes socks and takes a shower on 'B' Week Thursdays. Knowing that a "It's none of your business" is tantamount to a "yes", if he answers "no' and Cadet 'A' subsequently discovers that Cadet 'B' has had a sexual relation with his boyfriend for the past three years, what are the ramifications?

Can Cadet 'A' legitimately ask the question?

Would this fall under the above "social tact" exclusion?

Was an honor offense committed?

I'll answer that with something that is rarely said in these back-and-forth heated threads: I am not sure.

By the letter of the law, it would SEEM so. However, as I mentioned, the honor committee and the brigade honor captain are no doubt thinking of these same scenarios, and will surely offer guidance to the Corps.

I can see both sides of the issue in that scenario. Then you get into the gray areas. What if he isn't sure he's gay? What if he only thinks he might possibly be?

Hard to say. I'm sure the honor committee has a better answer. They may even have addressed it to the Corps already.
 
Accepted.

However, his other scenario is the one more troubling.

When a cadet is asked "Are you gay" and they answer "no" (for obvious reasons stated by Mongo) instead of "none of your business" and they are indeed gay (choosing not to reveal it i.e. "stay in the closet") have they committed an honor violation?

MemberLG says yes, they have committed an honor violation. In his example, to answer with a "none of your business" is fine, but to say "no" when in fact the opposite is true, is a lie and an honor violation.

If that is true, then in reality nothing has changed, and cadets will brought up on honor violations if they don't come out of the closet whenever asked about their sexual preference.

Things have changed as if a cadet telling others cadets that he or she a homosexual will not get this cadet separated.

Cadets and Midshipmen are held to a higher conduct standard than average college students. I don't have any sympathy to cadets/midshipmen that cannot accept the consequence of who they are and decisions they make. They are supposed to do right things and not what will be comfortable for them. I know they are young, but they are only few years away for becoming officers and leading soldiers/sailors.
 
As a product of a slightly different honor system, I phrased my scenario to address two levels. First off, does Cadet 'A' have the right to not want to room with a gay roommate? LGs comments about neutralness causes me to question this. If he does indeed have this right, any questioning would be beyond the scope of social niceties and answers would be subject to the honor code, I would think.

A completely different question. Three days into basic training, a recruit walks up to his DI and requests a new roommate because his current roommate is gay. What happens?
 
Cadets and Midshipmen are held to a higher conduct standard than average college students. I don't have any sympathy to cadets/midshipmen that cannot accept the consequence of who they are and decisions they make. They are supposed to do right things and not what will be comfortable for them. I know they are young, but they are only few years away for becoming officers and leading soldiers/sailors.
We crossposted. This is where I was headed with my discussion. Absolutely true. With rights come responsibilities.
 
So back to my hypothetical question. The annual end of cow year roommate shuffle. Rumor is that CADET 'B' is gay. He asks Cadet 'A' if he wants to room together the following year. Cadet 'A' asks if he is gay. Cadet 'B' is in dire straits. Most of his classmates have turned him down. The remaining, except for Cadet 'A', are ****** bags. Cadet 'B' may think the rumor of his gayness might be why no one wants to room with him. In reality, it is because he only changes socks and takes a shower on 'B' Week Thursdays. Knowing that a "It's none of your business" is tantamount to a "yes", if he answers "no' and Cadet 'A' subsequently discovers that Cadet 'B' has had a sexual relation with his boyfriend for the past three years, what are the ramifications?

Can Cadet 'A' legitimately ask the question?

Would this fall under the above "social tact" exclusion?

Was an honor offense committed?

Since ScoutPilot answered, I will add my two cents

Cadet A can ask any questions he wants. Cadet A's action does not excuse what Cadet B does. One intent behind the Honor Code is doing the right thing, it's not about what's comfortable, uncomfortable, or personal gains. Cadet B hasn't learned anything at West Point if his biggest consideration is getting a good or bad roommate, not doing the right thing or the honor code. I am sure other graduates could share their stories about good or bad roommates, but at worst a bad roommate only last a semester. So if Cadet B answered "no," he committed an honor violation. Cadet B's choices are "yes" or "none of your business." As a COW, Cadet B should be aware of his choices. If he doesn't he didn't learn anything about the Honor Code in last three years.

As for SA applicants, my advice is don't be afraid of the Honor Code as everyone is treated same, SAs, at least West Point, tries to create an environment to limit honor violations, and you will receive several hours of Honor instruction during the summer training, will have Honor Code training/instruction once a quarter or more (If I remember correctly), and each company has a Honor rep to provide assistance.

As ScoutPilot mentioned social tact has many gray areas. The example of the saying "good" to a bad meal, why would most folks won't consider it as a honor violation. First, it's a partial truth, it could have been "good" to make you feel not hungry or any free meal should be "good". As much as we want things to be black and white, many things in life are not black and white.
 
A completely different question. Three days into basic training, a recruit walks up to his DI and requests a new roommate because his current roommate is gay. What happens?

A similiar question was asked during my DADT repeal training.

Initial answer is no - sexual orientation neutral. Again personal comfort is a minor consideration.

The follow up answer is that the commander needs to consider other factors before finally denying the request - i.e. other than revealing sexual orientation, has your roommate committed any overt act.

I don't think new trainees get rooms. I could be wrong, but I think basic trainees are housed in open bays.
 
I'll answer that with something that is rarely said in these back-and-forth heated threads: I am not sure.

By the letter of the law, it would SEEM so. However, as I mentioned, the honor committee and the brigade honor captain are no doubt thinking of these same scenarios, and will surely offer guidance to the Corps.

I can see both sides of the issue in that scenario. Then you get into the gray areas. What if he isn't sure he's gay? What if he only thinks he might possibly be?

Hard to say. I'm sure the honor committee has a better answer. They may even have addressed it to the Corps already.

Thanks for the clarification.
 
First off, does Cadet 'A' have the right to not want to room with a gay roommate?

Cadet A has the right to not WANT to room with a gay roommate. But what he wants and what he is entitled are not the same.
 
I have a feeling Cadet A could put up a big enough stink, including in the press, that the administration would want to comply....that's a fire waiting to be started.
 
Back
Top