Timeline of Asian Americans in the Military & LGBTQ Movement in the Military
_Asian Americans in the Military
While Asian Americans fighting for the U.S.
has been mentioned in the annals of American military history since
the 19th century, little significance was placed upon
their contributions until World War II, when Japanese Americans
fought in Europe even though their families were interned at home in
America.
The recruitment of Asian Americans in the military has risen significantly within the past few years in places such as California. In Los Angeles County alone, Asian American enlistment had risen to 80% in 2008 (Watanabe 2009). In 2009, 22% of army recruits in Los Angeles County were Asian American (Shavelson 2010). This growth was likely due to incentives such as college tuition, job security, and possible U.S. citizenship. The most recent census showed 43,579 Asian Americans on active duty in 2010, which was about 3.7% of enlisted personnel. Most Asian Americans were in the Army or Navy. Among officer corps, around 8,400 were Asian American (3.9%) in 2010 (Watanabe 2009). | LGBTQ in the Military
_ Gays and lesbians have not been
accepted openly in American military service until recently. Anti-LGBTQ sentiments stem as far back as George Washington, who discharged a soldier (1778) for “homosexual
acts”. Before the “Don't Ask Don't Tell” policy
was repealed in 2011, homosexuality in the military was grounds for dismissal
or “honorable discharge.” Gays were especially discriminated
against since recruits were forced to go through screenings to test
their heterosexuality. Effeminate mannerisms, feminine appearance,
and even rectal size was checked during WWII, and about 4,000 men (out
of 12,000,000 recruits) were rejected for being gay (Webley 2010). Lesbians were
permitted to serve the war effort, since female sexuality was not a question in the early to mid-1900s.
Currently, while gays and lesbians may serve the U.S. openly, they still may face discrimination from their peers. In a study done in January 2010, approximately 66,000 gay, lesbian, or bisexual men and women were serving in the U.S. armed forces (Webley 2010). |
Asian American LGBTQ in the Military
_ An article published in 1998 by Julie Yuki Ralston gives commentary about the similarities between perceptions of Asian Americans and homosexuals in the U.S. military, especially during times of war in Asia. The argument focuses on two main stereotypes: one about Asian females (hypersexualized, submissive, live to serve white men) and one about gays (feminine, predatory, promiscuous).
The military man is generally considered to be a “white man”: a beacon of masculinity, biologically male of course, and heterosexual. This description automatically puts white heterosexuality at the forefront, demeaning females, minorities, and LGBTQ. The premise is simply that masculinity is everything that is not feminine. Soldiers-in-training in the armed forces are often called “ladies” or “girls” until they somehow prove their masculinity. Similarly, “queer” or “faggot” can be used to demean new recruits.
Asian women, along with being hypersexualized as a Geisha or Dragon Lady, are also heterosexualized. Since they are stereotyped as being exactly opposite to white military men and in the past have been readily available as prostitutes, they are seen as male-centric in terms of both sexual desire and means of existence. Asian women are considered easy to dominate and ready to serve in whichever way necessary. Their combination of traits (female, nonwhite, and heterosexual) defines the opposite persona -- male, white heterosexual, which reinforces masculinity.
Because of “Don't Ask Don't Tell,” LGBTQ in the U.S. military must pretend to be heterosexual in order to be accepted. Due to the stereotype of gays having feminine characteristics, one argument against LGBTQ in the military is that they cannot command respect as officers. A different argument asserts that if gay men are allowed to serve, they will automatically prey upon their fellow soldiers, which will cause a drop in morale and discipline. This is where the “feminine” women and “feminine” gay stereotypes differ. The presence of a gay man is a threat since it undermines the “real masculinity,” that is, the heterosexual white male. If gays become like predators, heterosexual men then become like women, which is a threat to the social structure.
Lesbian women, on the other hand, while still considered a threat, enter the military in greater proportion than gay men. Lesbian women and gay men challenge the construct of white male heterosexual masculine dominance. But lesbian women are easier to marginalize, simply because they are women. For example, Anu Bhagwati, an Indian American woman, left the Marines in 2004 because she felt discriminated and harassed. Bhagwati was an officer, but felt gender discrimination as well as racial discrimination.
This “military man” construct can only end if both racial and sexual integration are promoted. But with homophobia the way it is, the status quo will take a long time to change. However, in light of Danny Chen's discrimination, perhaps racial equality is closer on the horizon.
The story of Asian Americans in the Military and LGBTQ in the military don't converge often, but when they do, they provide an interesting perspective. Lt. Dan Choi is a gay man given honorable discharge from the military when he came out during the era of “Don't Ask Don't Tell.” He has been an outspoken activist against the policy, as well as a proponent of LGBTQ rights.
Asian American men especially struggle with stereotypes of femininity and lack of command. As a minority in America, they are extremely underrepresented in a military force with a little less than 1.5 million active members and 1.46 million in reserve. Asian Americans are not particularly visible in the American military society of whiteness, thus they become easier targets for racial slurs and discrimination. But within that minority, there is an even smaller LGBT statistic (possibly the often-quoted 10% of any given population).Overall, the military population (reserve and active duty) is barely 1% of the American population. If we take into consideration the statistics quoted above by Watanabe (2009), the percentage of Asian American lesbians and gays in the military is about 0.003%.
The military man is generally considered to be a “white man”: a beacon of masculinity, biologically male of course, and heterosexual. This description automatically puts white heterosexuality at the forefront, demeaning females, minorities, and LGBTQ. The premise is simply that masculinity is everything that is not feminine. Soldiers-in-training in the armed forces are often called “ladies” or “girls” until they somehow prove their masculinity. Similarly, “queer” or “faggot” can be used to demean new recruits.
Asian women, along with being hypersexualized as a Geisha or Dragon Lady, are also heterosexualized. Since they are stereotyped as being exactly opposite to white military men and in the past have been readily available as prostitutes, they are seen as male-centric in terms of both sexual desire and means of existence. Asian women are considered easy to dominate and ready to serve in whichever way necessary. Their combination of traits (female, nonwhite, and heterosexual) defines the opposite persona -- male, white heterosexual, which reinforces masculinity.
Because of “Don't Ask Don't Tell,” LGBTQ in the U.S. military must pretend to be heterosexual in order to be accepted. Due to the stereotype of gays having feminine characteristics, one argument against LGBTQ in the military is that they cannot command respect as officers. A different argument asserts that if gay men are allowed to serve, they will automatically prey upon their fellow soldiers, which will cause a drop in morale and discipline. This is where the “feminine” women and “feminine” gay stereotypes differ. The presence of a gay man is a threat since it undermines the “real masculinity,” that is, the heterosexual white male. If gays become like predators, heterosexual men then become like women, which is a threat to the social structure.
Lesbian women, on the other hand, while still considered a threat, enter the military in greater proportion than gay men. Lesbian women and gay men challenge the construct of white male heterosexual masculine dominance. But lesbian women are easier to marginalize, simply because they are women. For example, Anu Bhagwati, an Indian American woman, left the Marines in 2004 because she felt discriminated and harassed. Bhagwati was an officer, but felt gender discrimination as well as racial discrimination.
This “military man” construct can only end if both racial and sexual integration are promoted. But with homophobia the way it is, the status quo will take a long time to change. However, in light of Danny Chen's discrimination, perhaps racial equality is closer on the horizon.
The story of Asian Americans in the Military and LGBTQ in the military don't converge often, but when they do, they provide an interesting perspective. Lt. Dan Choi is a gay man given honorable discharge from the military when he came out during the era of “Don't Ask Don't Tell.” He has been an outspoken activist against the policy, as well as a proponent of LGBTQ rights.
Asian American men especially struggle with stereotypes of femininity and lack of command. As a minority in America, they are extremely underrepresented in a military force with a little less than 1.5 million active members and 1.46 million in reserve. Asian Americans are not particularly visible in the American military society of whiteness, thus they become easier targets for racial slurs and discrimination. But within that minority, there is an even smaller LGBT statistic (possibly the often-quoted 10% of any given population).Overall, the military population (reserve and active duty) is barely 1% of the American population. If we take into consideration the statistics quoted above by Watanabe (2009), the percentage of Asian American lesbians and gays in the military is about 0.003%.