Homosexuality in the united states air force

Abstract

HE DISPOSITION and interim handling of active duty personnel considered to be homosexual by The United States Air Force are governed entirely by the following regulations. Officers are handled by provisions in Air Force Manuals 36-2, 35-66, and 354. These regulations allow an officer being accused of homosexuality to resign “for the good of the service.” Further, they allow for expert medical and psychiatric testimony, and, if appropriate, medical personnel can take over the entire disposition of the case. Enlisted personnel are governed by AFM 39-12 with additional regulations, essentially for basic trainees, in AFM 39-2. Neither the officer nor the enlisted personnel regulations provide a definition of homosexuality or homosexual behavior. The regulations governing enlisted personnel do not allow expert medical and psychiatric opinion to take precedence over administrative opinion, nor do they discuss the handling of persons who are alleged to be homosexuals in any terms other than those of segregation from assumed heterosexual males. A final Air Force regulation governing the handling of homosexuals is found in AFM 125-2 on the operation of correctional facilities. It states, in part, “prisoners who are unresponsive to discipline, those who require protection from other prisoners, troublemakers, homosexuals, and confirmed narcotics addicts are placed in an administrative segregation.” The purpose of this paper is to propose specific changes in some of these regulations, and to point out areas where further discussion as to the validity of these regulations is necessary. The treatment of homosexuality, as it pertains to both understanding and, where appropriate, behavioral change, is different in the Air Force as compared to many civilian situations. Punitive attitudes are needlessly expressed, and useful personnel are excluded from service they may wish to render. The following case presents, in a dramatic way, the numerous difficulties current Air Force regulations governing homosexuality present to a realistic and human administrator. A.S., an Air Force AlC, was sentenced to a seven month confinement at the Lackland Air Force Base stockade. A letter from his commander accompanied him stating that there was an investigation pending by the Army CID.concerning alleged homosexual associations A.S. had with Army personnel. In accordance with AFM 125-2, he was placed in administrative segregation. In this status, the prisoner was isolated in a small cell and was permitted outside his cell only for purposes of hygiene, short exercise, a television period, and work detail when adequate supervision was possible. Initially, the code “H” was placed on an inspection record on the prisoner’s door. This code designated “homosexual,” and other prisoners, upon learning this, subjected A.S. to ridicule when they had the opportunity. Upon his complaint, the code was removed. The stockade personnel soon became concerned about the effect that the solitary conditions were having on the prisoner. He appeared depressed, with periods of agitation. Further information was sought. A.S.‘s commander was questioned and he stated that the prisoner was not a “convicted homosexual, but was being investigated.” Feeling his actual status was somewhat uncertain, the stockade commander arranged