The Military Veteran Wasn’t Stripped Of His Medals For His Sexuality – But For Expressing It

7
545

One of those not so subtle differences which the modern world tends to be all too keen to ignore. There is indeed something called sexuality. Who we are attracted to. We can argue about how this arises, through environment through life, through endocrines or whatever in the womb, through genetic establishments.

Actually, we variously say all three about different parts of human sexuality. All that talk about the cycle of abuse, child abuse and pederasty etc, the entire point there is that it is learned behaviour. Varied explanations for homosexuality, say, talk about genetic and foetal development issues. But sexuality, how we prefer to get our rocks off, is a thing.

Military veteran stripped of medals and discharged for his sexuality could have honours returned

Well, no. Our military veteran wasn’t discharged because of his sexuality but because of his sexual expression. We don’t jail people because they attracted to children but because they bugger them. Equally the military. They’re really not worried about what or who you’re attracted to, they do care who you do what with.

Military veterans stripped of medals and discharged from the armed forces for their sexuality could have their honours returned as a bisexual Falklands sailor launches legal bid. Joe Ousalice, 68, served for nearly 18 years in the Royal Navy but was discharged in 1993 prior to the lifting of the ban on LGBT people serving in the armed forces.

Entirely true that the Navy would hoick out anyone known to be gay or bi. But the point wasn’t the inclination it was the activity.

Perhaps that’s all most unfair and certainly other militaries have done it differently. Think it was the Spartans who near insisted that hoplites be bedding each other – creates that espirit de corps you see*. Modern armed forces take the opposite view, the jealousies engendered by private relationships kill that espirit de corps. Thus they crack down on heterosexual relationships within the same unit or up and down the command chain. Note, they don’t say that heterosexual men and women must not serve, nor must not serve together. Only that the expression of that love that dare speak its name not be done in that time and place.

Which brings us to that “discharged because bi-“. No, not really, discharged because partaking in bi sex while in the Navy. There is a difference and it is important.

As with the Catholic Church in fact. Nowt wrong with being gay, we’re all God’s special snowflakes. It’s the having sex outside a monogamous marriage between a man and a woman that’s problematic.

Yes, yes, I know, making such distinctions is pointless and messy, as with pissing into the wind. Still true though, the distinction between sexuality and sexual activity.

*Never really quite got that one, Greeks and Romans were just fine with pederasty but adult male homosexuality was something they generally didn’t hold with.