Dan Choi: “Hanoi Jane” Effect On Other Gay Vets?
We just read an interesting article on the GLTNN Web site titled The Oracle: Lt. Dan Choi, Rosa Parks or Hanoi Jane? It’s also the second piece we’ve read since last night that questions the actions of Lt. Dan Choi yesterday when he handcuffed himself to the White House fence. And this one is a lot more critical of Choi’s actions due to the fact that he along with Captain Jim Pietrangelo wore their military uniform while protesting DADT. This is a serious military offense. Both men could face a court martial.
According to the article, many LGBT veterans and others in the military were dismayed at the fact that he protested in uniform.
But see, that’s interesting because this is not the first time Choi has publicly demonstrated against DADT wearing his military duds. He also wore military attire when he spoke at the National Equality March last year in October. So we’re kinda confused as to why it was more problematic yesterday but okey doke last Fall?
What else noted in the piece is that so far no LGBT veterans rights organizations have spoken out in support of Choi since yesterday. We searched on the Net and couldn’t find anything, either. Nor is there any mention of Choi’s actions yesterday on the Service Members Legal Defense Network Web site. So we’re going to assume that the piece is correct. And that concerns us.
Did Choi shoot himself in the foot big time? We truly hope not. Especially if he’s booted out of the military for something than his being gay. That would defeat the whole purpose and significance of his protests. And by the way for you youngsters—Hanoi Jane is actress Jane Fonda. During the ’60s she was an anti-war activist who protested against the military and the United States government during the Vietnam War. Many military service members hated her for it. You can read more about her anti war activities at her bio on Wikipedia.
GLTNN: The Oracle: Lt. Dan Choi, Rosa Parks or Hanoi Jane?
News | Derrick Mathis March 19, 2010
6 Comments to “Dan Choi: “Hanoi Jane” Effect On Other Gay Vets?”
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
By NG, March 20, 2010 @ 1:08 am
People fear change and people hate what they fear.
It should come as no surprise that Lt. Dan Choi (and Capt Paitrangelo though he seems be escaping the brunt of the criticism) are being attacked as they are. Such always seems the case whenever someone demands transparency from those who've self anointed themselves as arbiters of the cause.
By Joshua, March 19, 2010 @ 11:47 pm
I have spent the last decade of my life as a gay USN Sailor. These men, while trying to do something admirable, did screw up – royally. There is no good reason to fire people over sexual orientation, but there is plenty of good reason to refrain from protesting government policy while using your military uniform as a symbol.
Do not protest in uniform. Period. Ever. For any reason.
I thought it was wrong when I saw him in DC last fall, and I thought it was even worse when he threw his self-important temper tantrum at the White House this week. This behavior does not play well in the military subculture, and is guaranteed to hurt the cause among those whose support we need most – those of us who currently serve.
I am a Sailor first, gay second. Mr. Choi would do well to reflect on this. No one is defending him because what he did was indefensible. It did not help our cause – it hurt. It only remains to be seen how much it hurt.
By derrick9, March 21, 2010 @ 2:50 am
I don't think the gay public gets that there is a standalone community among military personnel with a whole other set of rules and ethics. I think a lot of the public thinks that because someone is gay those rules don't necessarily have to be acknowledged or respected.
But I don't think the gay public gets just how separate military life is from civilian life—particularly in respect to DADT. However, it looks like they'll soon be finding out.
By @PBCliberal, March 21, 2010 @ 8:13 am
I wouldn't be so sure you're getting the whole story at GLTNN. The author is at odds with most biographer's accounts of why Rosa Parks refused to sit at the back of the bus, which one commenter pointed out. I commented on that point as well, and after 24 hours, my comment is still "awaiting moderation." Only one additional comment (with a timestamp later than mine) has been approved.
Obviously, it is GTLNN's right to control the content as they see fit, but I wouldn't be surprised if a whole lot of comments are "awaiting moderation" that differ with the author's point of view.
Could it be that Lt. Choi's damning transgression was that he hijacked HRC and Bravo's rally and video acquisition event and the "old boy" network of LGBT organizations are scared to death of losing control? They really serve two masters; their donors, and the tables of power where they gain admittance because they represent (and can control) their constituencies.
What is the Obama administration to think, when it believes it has our minority in its pocket because of the suited supplicants who claim they represent us, and then it looks out the White House window and sees two well-known gay guys who have been displayed by and should be under the control of Gay, Inc. chained to the fence?
By NG, March 21, 2010 @ 9:24 pm
HRC exploited DADT for the purposes of allowing a comedian tape a segment for her TV show and allow for her to call someone cuckoo pants.
Lt. Choi may not may the best choice to serve as a leader – who is, really ? – but, the fact is, there were hundreds of other people there, including the HRC, and they could have capitalized on the situation to their advantage too. Instead, they went on lockdown, doing the very thing the anti-gay opposition does.
By 1855704, May 15, 2011 @ 6:36 pm
1855704 beers on the wall.