Queerty is better as a member

Log in | Register
  don't tell hell

The Navy Is Discharging Jarod McIntosh Because It Found Photos Of His Boyfriend on a Cell Phone

Meet Jarod McIntosh. He’s being discharged from the Navy because he accidentally brought his camera-equipped cell phone into a submarine, which is a restricted area. Yes, that was a dumb move. But even dumber is what happened afterward.

His superiors confiscated his phone to ensure it didn’t contain any classified material. It didn’t. But there were what sounds like intimate photos of Jared and his boyfriend Doug. Jared is being discharged not for breaking the rules about bringing audio-video equipment into a restricted area, but for being gay. He’s appealing the separation.

By:           Sarah Nigel
On:           Aug 9, 2010
Tagged: , , ,

  • 61 Comments
    • concernedcitizen
      concernedcitizen

      Sad and just demonstrates how stupid a policy DADT is and how antiquated and destructive toward an effective US militairy!!!! Just shameful!

      Aug 9, 2010 at 10:07 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • fr
      fr

      Don’t ask… DADT is a two way street. They asked after they didn’t find anything compromising pertinent to security. It reminds me of search and seizure laws. (They didn’t have a warrant for that material.) What happened to liberty for all. Liberty is doing what you want as long as no one else gets hurt, until held negligent in a court of law.

      Aug 9, 2010 at 10:37 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TiredOldQueen@Queerty
      TiredOldQueen@Queerty

      Awe, dude. At least there is a whole world of opportunity for you on the outside, judging by what others who count think of you. Just keep working hard, being smart, and move on.

      Aug 9, 2010 at 10:46 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TheTokenMormon
      TheTokenMormon

      That’s ridiculous. I don’t know as much about DADT as I would like, but I do know that this is STUPID and I don’t care how morally correct or incorrect homosexuality is, discrimination is wrong. Would Jesus Christ kick this man out of his military? No. He would not. Because He loves us all, black, white, green, orange, gay, straight, asexual, athiest, Buddhist, Muslim, you name it!

      Aug 9, 2010 at 10:57 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Billy Leung
      Billy Leung

      Hey there – sorry about the horrible experience, and the nasty sh!t that comes with DADT! It’s not only a shame to have such policy in place, but the fact that they are actively pursuing it. Don’t despair – you can discharge on me any time! :P

      Aug 9, 2010 at 11:10 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Joe in Savannah
      Joe in Savannah

      FR, military law is very different from civilian law. They dont need a warrant, because it was against the rules to have the item and thats why it was confinscated. However, its very sad that things like this continue to happen. I also remember reading about the cops in Minnesota or one of those states in the midwest, who looked through a window and saw a woman in the air force’s marriage certificate, and alerted the air force, who then kicked her out. This kind of thing scares me, because my partner and I have been toget for 4 year, and he has been in the military for 10 years. I just count our blessings that nothing like this has happened yet for us, and just always have to be careful.

      Now what really sucks is that we do live together, but they just built new barracks, so the army is trying to put him in the barracks as soon as he gets back from Afghanistan. They see him as being single, so they want to put him into the barracks, but we cant afford an apartment without the military paying him the BAH, so, since the rules being the way they are, we either lose our apartment and most of the things in it, or we break the law and find some chick to marry him to, just so we can keep what is rightfully ours.

      Aug 9, 2010 at 11:13 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • PLAYS WELL WITH OTHERS
      PLAYS WELL WITH OTHERS

      Gimmie a fcuking break………You got hundreds of 18-24 year old guys are holed up in a massive phallic shaped vessel for months at a time ya don’t think the Navy doesn’t know there is a lot of Homo-sex going on down there?…….and the Navy with a straight face (pun intended) kicks this poor guy out for a few pics on a cell phone????

      Aug 9, 2010 at 11:37 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Ash
      Ash

      This is just sad. DADT is just legal discrimination and it’s disgusting. I’m so proud to say we no longer have this crap up here in Canada.

      Aug 10, 2010 at 12:21 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Lance
      Lance

      I’m sorry that this happened to him. It is refreshing to hear that both a captain and a chief were willing to back Jarod and speak in his favor to the separation board. I live close to Kings Bay, in my hometown, and this sickens me that much more.

      Aug 10, 2010 at 12:45 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Mark
      Mark

      Notice he said, ” My Capt wants me to stay because I am a good sailor”. You see, it had NOTHING to do with the fact that this man who chose to defend our country is gay. My Capt, said the exact same thing before he had to discharge me. It is because of the OLD Higher Ups on the chain that DADT will continue to be enforced. America will continue to get it wrong for many more yeats to come. It will not be until something worse than 9/11 happens that the Military will finally realize how much they need ALL those who wish to serve their country. Then at that moment I hope all the Gay Men and Women they ask to serve tells them to Go To Hell ! Now You Need Us…I don’t think so!

      Aug 10, 2010 at 12:51 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • L-InAustin
      L-InAustin

      I wish we had democratic leadership with a backbone. One of those actions would have been for a Presidential Executive Order halting the implementation of DADT while it is under review. This would have halted any of these brave men and women from being expelled in a policy we all know is likely to be gone soon.

      We just don’t have a leader who takes risks. Oh well, better than the alternative.

      Aug 10, 2010 at 1:17 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B
      B

      No. 10 · Mark wrote, “It will not be until something worse than 9/11 happens that the Military will finally realize how much they need ALL those who wish to serve their country. Then at that moment I hope all the Gay Men and Women they ask to serve tells them to Go To Hell ! Now You Need Us…I don’t think so!”

      If something significantly worse than 9/11 happens, they’ll simply restart the draft – then, if you tell them to “go to hell” because they previously rejected you, they’ll just throw you in jail. They should think about how much “enthusiasm” or “loyalty” they should expect from people who are treated that way – yet another argument for repealing DADT.

      Jarod’s mistake was an easy one to make – you put the phone in your pocket in the morning while still running on autopilot and forget about it. They should have ignored the photos on the grounds that they were searching for classified information and had no right to look at anything else.

      Aug 10, 2010 at 1:26 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • codyj
      codyj

      Marks.. comment about the ‘old higher ups’ is so true…and until these rigid control freaks, with their 1950s-60s mind set either retire or die off,this harm ,and stupidity will continue. Remember, when the ‘higher ups’ were Jarods age, their superiors thought it jus’ fine, to let Blacks serve, BUT ONLY if COMPLETELY SEGREGATED, …looking back at that now…HOW STUPID WAS THAT?? My heart goes out to you Jarod, good luck in the fight, now ,an always…CodyJ ( a 20 yr )

      Aug 10, 2010 at 5:14 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • j
      j

      @B: Sadly, it appears that when soldiers step into their workplaces they leave their humanity at the door. This “military law different that civilian law” is bullshit. Laws are enacted to protect people. The law to personal privacy is there for a very valid reason and to remove it (even when his superior officers could still ensure the security of his peers while respecting it) is not a way to ensure law and order, it is a way to dehumanise soldiers and remove their individuality. Indeed it appears that’s what the military’s about, not getting good men and women to the front line so they can do the job they willingly signed up to do.

      Aug 10, 2010 at 5:44 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • WalkderDC
      WalkderDC

      Didn’t the administration say that they were changing DADT so that people weren’t going to be investigated unless they actually came out and said that they were gay? Looks like thats going really well.

      Aug 10, 2010 at 7:49 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bill Perdue
      Bill Perdue

      If anyone wondered if institutionalized homophobia is a powerful force in the US military and the right wing christer officer class, here’s your answer.

      It’s just another example of why Obama’s DADT compromise is just as ugly as Clintons.

      Aug 10, 2010 at 8:28 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Kevin
      Kevin

      @WalkderDC: No, they said that they weren’t going to investigate based solely on “third party” claims; i.e., someone other than the soldier himself (an ex, say) making accusations. They’ll still investigate in cases where a soldier comes out or where actual evidence is in play.

      @Bill Perdue: Maybe there wouldn’t be a “right-wing christer officer class” if liberals and progressives were more willing to serve.

      Aug 10, 2010 at 9:29 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bill Perdue
      Bill Perdue

      There were ‘liberals and progressives’ in the Wehrmacht.

      It didn’t stop this:

      [img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/75/Einsatzgruppen_Killing.jpg[/img]

      And from Palestine to Iraq it doesn’t stop this
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vwVSt7csXdk . This is why they’re trying to crucify PFC Bradley Manning.

      Aug 10, 2010 at 10:10 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Tom
      Tom

      For the life of me I can’t understand why people are getting so worked up about joining killing organizations.

      Aug 10, 2010 at 10:59 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • JamieMcG
      JamieMcG

      @Tom:

      I have no desire to personally join the military, but this is an employment discrimination issue. The military is the largest single employer in this country. While I disagree with war, I can’t help but fight for equality for LGBT people.

      Aug 10, 2010 at 11:30 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Rob
      Rob

      I was in the Navy for 6 years and saw people getting caught with phones in restricted areas quite often. Most of the time their phone gets confiscated and returned to them later with a slap on the hand. The military uses nonjudicial punishment, this allows his chain of command to cut corners and choose who to and who not to crucify or make example of. In reality, someone in his chain of command is out to get him. He didn’t share the photos, they were taken from him, which I don’t see how that violates DADT. I feel sorry for the guy. Repeal DADT.

      Aug 10, 2010 at 11:48 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Kieran
      Kieran

      Meanwhile, the “Change YOU Can Believe In” Obamas are happily galivanting across Spain on holiday. Hey Mr. President, “DO THE RIGHT THING”. Sign an executive order outlawing this Jim Crow law from the US military. Do it NOW.

      Aug 10, 2010 at 12:32 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bubba
      Bubba

      we want to see the pic of the boyfriend!!! were they in compromising positions?

      Aug 10, 2010 at 1:00 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • axos
      axos

      It’s so cowardly to discharge people for the simple reason they are gay – especially since the military have already stated it doesn’t really matter by introducing the dumb DADT. How can anyone discharge someone on those grounds without hanging their heads in shame and blush? This is the MILITARY. They’re supposed to fight and be prepared to die – and they run like scared rabbits when they spot a gay person?

      Aug 10, 2010 at 1:21 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Tiffany
      Tiffany

      Thank you so much for putting this up. He is a friend of one of my close friends and we are trying to get the word out. I will keep you posted on any progress that is made.

      Aug 10, 2010 at 1:53 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B
      B

      No. 19 · Tom wrote, “For the life of me I can’t understand why people are getting so worked up about joining killing organizations.”

      …. it’s not joining but getting booted out with a less than an honorable discharge merely for having pictures of a loved one on a cell phone. Getting a general discharge can have negative implications: e.g., not being covered by the G.I. Bill. Basically they are persecuting this guy.

      BTW, for employment, he might have to explain a less than honorable discharge, which in his case would require divulging his sexual orientation, thus increasing the risk of not being hired due to anti-gay discrimination, which is harder to prove than discrimination leading to termination.

      Aug 10, 2010 at 1:55 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Xander Gibb
    • David
      David

      @Tom: The government is saying that it’s ok to exclude people for nothing other than being gay. If it’s ok for the Federal gov’t to do it, then it’s ok for state governments to do it, and from there on to business, and etc.

      Aug 10, 2010 at 2:56 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Nicole
      Nicole

      I’m going to get major hate for this but… here it goes. I do not feel sorry for Jarod. I have been in the Air Force for 10 year. He’s been in the Navy for 6. So he must know the rules by now. While DADT has been updated to no longer accept third party allegations as grounds for discharge; there have been no other changes. Superiors cannot ask a person their orientation. If a military member tells their orientation it is the other member’s lawful duty to report to the Chain of Command. Also, Jarod made it pretty clear the photos were the type that made it quite clear he was homosexual. I’m pretty sure there was no asking involved. This would not be considered third party.

      The military had every right to search his cell phone pictures as he did break the law by taking his phone into a secure area prohibiting such an item. This law is in place for YOUR protection folks! National security okay.

      So, Jarod knows he is gay. Knows he can be discharged for being gay. He probably takes many precautions to ensure he’s not caught in any other way by his fellow military members…except he takes pictures of him and his boyfriend in the middle of their homosexual acts. Yep, he has concrete proof of his homosexuality. You know that rule for celebrities…don’t make a sex tape if you don’t ever want it to get leaked? Well, same goes for everyone else. Don’t take pictures or make videos; you will eventually get caught.

      So man. You know the rules. You broke them. No one would feel sorry for you if you killed someone and were going to prison and you tried to appeal. You know it’s wrong…so don’t do it. I’m not saying being gay is wrong. However, you knew when you enlisted in the military you couldn’t be openly gay. You knew if you ever got caught in the act you could be discharged no questions asked, and then you handed them the proof on a silver platter.

      Good luck in the civilan world. At least you can be open.

      Aug 10, 2010 at 4:29 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B
      B

      No. 29 · Nicole wrote, “The military had every right to search his cell phone pictures as he did break the law by taking his phone into a secure area prohibiting such an item.” He violated security regulations inadvertently, causing no harm, which is different from violating the law.

      The person reviewing the pictures, who probably did not know what Jarod looked like, could have ignored them as he would not have known who it was a picture of nor even whether Jarod had taken the picture.

      So I’d say Jarod was treated shabbily. It’s not like he was going around telling others about his boyfriend (which is not allowed under the DADT policy) or showing those pictures to other sailors.

      Also, nothing said so far shows these were sexually explicit photos – it could have just been pictures of him and his boyfriend kissing, maybe with their shirts off, not something X-rated.

      Aug 10, 2010 at 4:44 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jarod
      Jarod

      Hey guys I just wanted to say thank you to everybody who has posted and the ones who have done what they can to help me. I am in no way trying to play the victim I just think that this is wrong and I don’t want it to happen to anybody else so i’m going to do what i can to get the word out there. And @Nicole a couple of things. Just because something is a rule does not make it right (meaning dadt not the restricted area) Yes I knew that it was against the rules to take my phone down to the boat but in my defense bringing your phone to the boat is something that people very senior to me do on a daily basis it was kind of tribal knowledge I guess that as long as you don’t get caught it’s ok. This does not make what i did okay. But as far as my cell phone goes i think most ppl would agree that cell phones contain a lot of personal info not just pictures because we can use them for internet etc. Them going through my phone was like them going through my home computer or bedroom and they did this without my knowledge or permission and for security purposes not evidence against me. What was on my phone did not hurt anybody at all though i’m sure it made the guy looking through my phone uncomfortable. lol. Thanks for listening guys and again i appreciate every bodys support.

      Aug 10, 2010 at 5:15 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Craig
      Craig

      Jarod, it may hurt now but you are better off being out of this dishonorable military. It is a despicable system to make people lie and hide who they are. Even worse to ask our most brave citizens to go without or hide the love and support of their chosen family while they are ready to sacrifice their lives for this country every day. End DADT now.

      Aug 10, 2010 at 6:29 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • THERE ARE MORE JUST LIKE ME
      THERE ARE MORE JUST LIKE ME

      Hey “Mr. Hope & Change™”, YOU can end all of this foolishness with a stroke of a pen! What happened to all of those wonderful promises you made? What happened to “Change You Can Believe In™”? How many more valuable servicemembers do we have to sacrifice at the altar of stupidity before we realize that this law has no place in the military of a modern industrialized country? Oh well, tossed under the bus again. . .

      Aug 10, 2010 at 8:36 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Baddood
      Baddood

      Too bad He actually got kicked out for being a complete total shit bag and He’s feeding you all a lie. For 3 years of his navy career he continued to make poor judgement calls.

      Aug 10, 2010 at 8:38 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • concernedcitizen
      concernedcitizen

      @Baddood: You’re a classless douche. Whether he had “poor judgement calls” in his past is irrelevant and nothing more than an argument ad hominem what matter is the reason cited for him being kicked out of the military. According to his report, and I would assume he would know better than you he was actually there, (and if you were there and attempting to leak some confidential information that makes you the biggest amoral douche in the post) he was removed not because of any past grievances or even the issue of having the cell phone. He was generally discharged for being gay. The point is he nor anyone else should be removed from the military or any job because of their sexual orientation. Stop being divisive and petty.

      Aug 10, 2010 at 10:14 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Michael
      Michael

      Wow, this video is very, very powerful. It’s very simple, very in-the-living-room-with-only-me-and-my-cam, the story is straight forward and the last few seconds, though I don’t know exactly what it is, sends chills down your spine.

      I know this is off-topic but, damn, that guy is beau. I thank God about every other day that it’s the pretty boys who are queer.

      Aug 10, 2010 at 10:46 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • alan brickman
      alan brickman

      Gays rock as militery..let them serve already!!!

      Aug 10, 2010 at 10:55 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Hyhybt
      Hyhybt

      “It reminds me of search and seizure laws. (They didn’t have a warrant for that material.)”

      Police don’t always need warrants, and those don’t have to be for what they find.

      Aug 11, 2010 at 9:51 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Ronbo
      Ronbo

      Call your elected President and let him know your thought on sexual discrimination! No, wait, Obama said “God is in the mix” and finds you “in error” for not being straight and married to the opposite sex.

      At least his words (not his deeds) should give you comfort. No, wait, his press secretary, Robert Gibbs, called you “professional left”, “lunatic”, “whiner” and you “need to be drug tested.” Congratulations America!

      If you don’t feel like Congratulating yourself, call the pissy pressy at 202-456-1414. Don’t be nice, the time for adoring this Religious Bigot is over.

      Aug 11, 2010 at 10:50 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Queer Supremacist
      Queer Supremacist

      @Ronbo: I never liked him to begin with. Why am I not surprised.

      Another day, another justification for my handle.

      Aug 11, 2010 at 11:09 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Nathan
      Nathan

      While I don’t agree with him being discharged, isn’t it “don’t ask don’t tell”? He pretty much told them he was gay when he brought his phone with him and had them search it.

      Aug 11, 2010 at 1:36 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Nicole
      Nicole

      @Jarod-I find it odd that you enlisted in the military knowing you couldn’t be openly gay and now you’re upset that you are being discharged in accordance with this law. You’ve been in for 6 years and DADT has been a law for 15 years so you definitely can’t claim ignorance of it. During the enlistment process you are briefed on it and have to acknowledge it. No one is saying it’s right or wrong. However, you voluntarily signed up to serve under that law. Then you took your phone with evidence on it of your homosexuality into an area that put you in a position to have it searched. I find it very hard to believe you were not aware that your phone would not be searched after it was confiscated. You obviously work in an area with classified material; in the interest of National Security, OF COURSE your phone was going to be searched! So what if senior member’s do it. If they were jumping off bridges with grenades in their mouths…would you? They might also everyday go through a thorough search of their phones. Sorry your career is ending but you made that choice by carrying around the exact proof of your orientation. A six year enlisted member definitely knows better; especially a homosexual member that has a career to protect.

      @B – Check out Articles 90, 91, 92, and 98. That’s breaking the law. By disobeying the security regulation Jarod could have easily been found in violation of any of the above articles.

      @Nathan – EXACTLY – I don’t think others are understanding how it works and that he’s not being treated badly by the military. He knew the rules. He’s known them since he enlisted voluntarily. Can’t really say anything more.

      Aug 12, 2010 at 3:52 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Nicole
      Nicole

      @Jarod You mentioned on Perezhilton.com that you wouldn’t be getting discharged if you had pictures of you and a girlfriend committing sodomy. You’re possibly correct…however you would be in violation of Article 125 of the UCMJ and could have been court martialed which could have still ended with your being sentenced to jail time, forfeiture of pay and allowances, etc…and in turn giving you a criminal record.

      Aug 12, 2010 at 7:54 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jon
      Jon

      1). Jarod: I’m sorry for what happened to you. If it was only your CO or COB who saw the pics, my guess is they’d have turned a blind eye. In any case, I think it’s a positive step that they had the guts to testify on your behalf. I’ve seen retribution against people who testified “the wrong way” on matters like these.

      2). Nicole: You are extremely naive if you really think that every 17-18 year old fully understands his/her sexual orientation when they sign the DADT disclaimer upon enlisting. I have met military members in their late 20′s or older who thought they were straight when they signed up, then realized they might not be. Given the value of a military pension, should they just pack it in if they serve ten years, then realize they might not be straight after all?

      3). People who think Obama can/should get rid of DADT tomorrow: No. It’s an act of Congress. It can only be overturned by majorities in the House and Senate, then signed by the President. So far, overturning DADT has passed the House. Obama has wisely declined to pursue the matter further until he schmooze the brass some more, and arrange for an orderly transition. Simply removing DADT overnight would be a disaster. Homophobic CO’s could give you bad evals, deny promotions, allow harassment or worse unless education comes from the top that such will not be allowed without penalty.

      Aug 14, 2010 at 11:54 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Nicole
      Nicole

      @Jon Whether or not Jarod knew he was gay when he enlisted he was damn certain when he walked onto that sub that day with his prohibited cell phone with the damning photos. By that point he full well knew those photos if ever found would be concrete proof in a DADT case to discharge him; regardless if he was aware of his sexuality upon enlistment 6 years ago. My point is he’s complaining about being held accountable. What he needs to do is quit complaining and trying to play the “poor pitiful gay me” card. Sorry he’s gay, sorry he got kicked out, and sorry the military still has this law in effect. However, as you pointed out simply overturning DADT would be a fiasco. Jarod should have be more responsible. Plain and simple. So to Jarod, stop complaining and man up for your actions, you f’ed up now take it like a real man.

      Aug 15, 2010 at 2:43 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Nicole
      Nicole

      @Jon also..as for your pension question. There are MANY sacrifices every member in the military has to make. Right now homosexual members have to keep their orientation hidden or yes “pack it in” a you put it. I have worked with individuals that put in their full 20 years, retired and then once they were out they came out of the closet to us. Blew us away because we had no clue. Senior individuals that had been in the military before DADT was a law; if they can do with professionalism and honor–I’m sure others can; if they so choose. In the Air Force there are three core values, one of which is Service Before Self. Many members that are homosexual hold to that as they keep their orientation hidden because they are committed to serving their country so cowards like Jarod can break simple rules then cry “others do it” and “they were my personal pictures” and “it’s not fair”

      For the future people should remember that for every action there are consequences; and the consquences may not be what you expected. Hopefully, a lesson, very hard lesson learned.

      Aug 15, 2010 at 2:59 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jon
      Jon

      @ Nicole:
      I’ve seen people show up armed and drunk on duty, who were punished and allowed to stay in. Tell me who’s a greater danger to US Security? The drunk on duty guy, or the guy who has a boyfriend off base?

      Yes, if he happened to realize that he was gay shortly before his re-enlistment date, he would have been wise to take the thousands of dollars in taxpayer funded training he received into the private sector. Fortunately, since we are not in any major military conflicts at the moment, we don’t have to worry about a “brain drain” of otherwise qualified gay and lesbian servicemembers leaving over this policy.

      If he realized he was gay soon after signing an enlistment or re-enlistment contract, he’s in trouble if he tries to get out by playing the “gay” card. The military can keep you in for months while they consider the case, and reduce your duties to the most degrading possible, as a lesson to straights who might try to play the “gay” card. Harassment? Encouraged.

      I find it interesting that you have such an easy time calling a sailor you’ve never met a coward. You haven’t worked with him, haven’t seen his service record, nothing. One thing I can tell you is that it takes a certain amount of intestinal fortitude to stand up to a Navy Administrative Separation Board, admit you’re gay, and say that you still want to serve in the Navy. Anyone who’s seen an AdSep Board will tell you it’s not a happy experience for the Defendant.

      Aug 16, 2010 at 3:18 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Nicole
      Nicole

      @Jon

      We are NOT involved in any major military conflicts? Really? Are you friggin’ blind/deaf!? So what are the thousands of Soldiers, Sailors, Marines, and Airmen doing in Iraq and Afghanistan doing right now? They’re just being killed by friendly, well wishing citizens of said countries? Okay. Even if you may not agree with it, people are dying everyday. Even gay people proudly serving.

      Yes, there have been folks that have shown up drunk for duty and not been kicked out. The reason is that the rules/laws they violated did not specifically say that on 1st offense you will be gone.

      Upon either admiting you are gay or evidence of your homosexuality coming to light you are automatically put on the road to discharge. It’s plain and simple. Life is not fair. Not all rules are instated for safety either. Drunk on duty not safe? For what job? Is it unsafe for someone that works in the finance office to be drunk on duty? Not really; against the law; but not exactly life threatening or a threat to national security. A cop shows up for duty drunk…bet his ass will be stripped of rank if not discharged. I’ve served on MANY court martial boards for first time offenders. Just like in the civilian world all crimes are not punished the same across the board.

      EXCEPT DADT.

      Hey, how about we just drop DADT today? Do you realize how many gay/lesbian individuals lives will be lost?? There are enough people that are not open minded enough to handle it. We are all aware of that fact. It’s scary to think that one day homosexuals will be serving openly. I find it scary because I know there will be that man/men that will be non-tolerant that will be so brutal. He will knock the gay man’s teeth out, brutally rape him, then murder him. All for being openly gay. That’s scary.

      As for taking that thousands of dollars in taxpayers money…well that’s why that option of being able to walk in to your chain of command and TELL and be discharged. That way you are free to be an openly gay person and make the decision. When people only do a 4 or 6 year enlistment and just leave the military is that considered a waste of taxpayer money because they simply decide they’ve gotten what they needed out of the military? Do people look down on others that don’t make a career out of the military and feel angry? NOPE! So if, upon his re-enlistment window he had already figured out he was gay and knew he would have a tough time keeping that part of his life hidden while serving there would have been no dishonor nor feelings of waste for not continuing a career in the military. Just as it’s not considered a waste when any other person; gay or straight; only does a few years in the military. So your theory of waste…a load of crap!

      It didn’t take any courage to go into a sep board and say he’s gay…they were already WELL aware of that fact considering he handed them photographic evidence. I called him a coward for being out here saying it’s unfair and he didn’t do anything wrong. He’s not admiting that he reaped what he sowed.

      No one is in “trouble” when they say, “Hey, I know I’ve enlisted/re-enlisted. However, I’m gay.” Yes, they will have the person speak with mental health to ensure someone is not trying to play the system. They will make the person pay back any bonuses they were given…but that’s basic contract stuff…all written in the contracts. If you don’t fulfill the contract; you pay the money back.

      My question is: If Jarod had taken his cell phone down to the sub, gotten busted with it, and the base security folks found pictures he had taken of him committing a rape or a murder he would have otherwise gotten away with…what would everyone be saying? He would have never been caught had he not had his phone confiscated. According to Jarod those pictures on his phone are personal and they had no right to see them or use them against him to discharge him for violating a law. Just because the law is that he not be openly gay it’s okay he broke it. If he’d committed what everyone agrees is a “fair” law no one would give a shit about supporting Jarod! Everyone would agree he got his just desserts. Or does anyone think he’s valid in thinking he would have a right to appeal the charges of rape/murder based on what he feels is the unfair searching of his personal photos on his personal cell phone that he likens to a personal computer.

      Aug 16, 2010 at 8:30 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Richard Ford
      Richard Ford

      Beyond the obvious, I can only say that Jarod McIntosh’s boyfriend Doug is a very lucky guy.

      Aug 17, 2010 at 8:09 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jon
      Jon

      Nicole:

      This will be my last post on this topic. I don’t think anyone else is reading, and we are not going to convince each other.

      1) a) I assure you that I am not “frigging blind or deaf”, thanks for your concern. I know that we are involved in major military conflicts– certainly the most serious and deadly since the end of the Cold War. Obviously, my attempt at sarcasm went over your head just like an F-16. You might want to look up sarcasm. It’s a rhetorical device often used to point out flaws in an opponent’s argument in a humorous manner.

      b) The point of my sarcastic jibe, since you missed it, is that these are times in which the loss of highly trained personnel over antiquated policies based on prejudice is a loss that the nation bears at its’ peril. Look up Alan Turing on Wikipedia if you get a chance.

      2) I am glad that you are concerned for the safety of gay and lesbian military personnel. I agree– if the policy was repealed overnight WITHOUT A SERIOUS EDUCATION CAMPAIGN, AND CLEAR SIGNS TO EVERYONE FROM THE FOUR-STARS TO THE LOWEST PRIVATE THAT HARASSMENT AND DISCRIMINATION WOULD NO LONGER BE TOLERATED gay and lesbian servicemembers would be at risk. But, if the policy was changed from the top down, with clear guidelines and appropriate regulations and senior level guidance and support, the military would eventually adjust. People in the military take orders. It’s what they do. I’m sure there are whites in the military who hate blacks and vice-versa, but the bottom line is when you serve, you put your personal feelings on the back-burner and act like a professional. You don’t have to respect the person– but you BETTER respect the rank.

      3) You are on the wrong side of history. Gays and lesbians serve openly in the vast majority of our NATO allies (Turkey is the only exception I can think of), and so far Western Civilization has not crumbled. There was a time when blacks could not serve, or could only serve in segregated units. That time has passed. It was not long ago that Filipinos would only serve in the galley on a Navy ship. That time has passed. There was a time when admitting a woman to West Point or Annapolis would’ve been inconceivable. That time has passed. True, none of these changes came without controversy and friction– many even predicted that they would be the end of a powerful US military. But those times have passed. You can hold onto your beliefs about DADT as long as you want– but you are trying to push the tide back with a broom.

      I will hold good to my promise. I won’t post on this topic again. Nicole, you get the last word.

      Aug 18, 2010 at 6:40 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Nicole
      Nicole

      @Jon… Wikipedia? Really? Sorry, I have no idea what the entire section you wrote about even said; all my eyes focused on was “wikipedia” as a reference and now I know you’re an idiot-regardless if it’s meant to be sarcastic or not. You have just referenced wikipedia! Fail.

      Also, sarcasm-sorry I’m not used to people making jokes when having a heated debate during a discussion in which emotion isn’t easily conveyed so I only had to assume you were serious.

      Aug 18, 2010 at 9:38 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Nicole
      Nicole

      @Jon – Now that I’ve gotten over you using Wikipedia as part of your response.

      You think I give 1 shit about gays serving. I don’t. Go for it. I’ll be happy when this archaic and backward thinking rule is gone. However, I still think it’s a crock of shit that this dumbass… Yes you Jarod, is crying about getting kicked out. Sorry! As Jon so eloquently stated…”People in the military take orders. It’s what they do…but the bottom line is when you serve, you put your personal feelings on the back-burner and act like a professional.” So why can’t/couldn’t Jarod?

      Weee!! I get last word…big f’ing deal. I just can’t get over how many people are ignorant and think Jarod did nothing wrong.

      Congrats, you’re gay. Stop using it as your get out of jail free card.

      Please Congress, The Senate, The House, The President, The Military…find a way to speed up time and get DADT out of here so these self righteous and selfish ass gays can stop using this shit as an excuse to cry about not following other rules and getting kicked out!

      Aug 18, 2010 at 9:45 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Sarah
      Sarah

      Jon- 1) Why are giving history lessons? It is quite apparent that many things were once upon a time unheard of and have since changed. What does any of that matter in regards to the story here?

      2)I was in the Army for 3 years. It wasn’t for me so I left. (I sure hope no tax payers out there feel like I wasted their money!!) I am enjoying my post 9/11 bill benefits. (Although I initially joined for the GI Bill benefits) My intent all along was never to make it a career..am I a fraud?

      3) It appears “Nicole” understands very clearly that the in the process of DADT being overturned much care will need to be taken..so what was your point in reiterating that? Do you have a personal agenda with this person? You’re starting to come off as not having anything to say about the topic at hand but want to argue for arguments sake…without even realizing you’re stating things the person is either already supporting or just giving unneeded lessons.

      4) Your statement “Jarod: I’m sorry for what happened to you. If it was only your CO or COB who saw the pics, my guess is they’d have turned a blind eye.” Is disturbing in the fact that you are stating you are guessing a commanding officer would break the law.

      Nicole- I see where you are coming from. I agree that folks seem to be solely focusing on the fact that he is being discharged for being gay. Not the fact that he got himself to that point by admittedly breaking strict rules and then handing them evidence to lawfully discharge him under a very well publicized law.

      This gay agenda is getting on my nerves. Stop using it as the new race card…makes me want to go back in the closet.

      Aug 19, 2010 at 5:56 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cape Power
      Cape Power

      DADT isn’t a Military Law!!! It’s United States Public Law!!! Your dear Congress and President are the ones that put it in place many years ago. In fact DADT was put in place to ALLOW homosexuals to serve. Get the facts.

      US Public Law Title 10654

      Aug 19, 2010 at 7:02 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • trc
      trc

      Just out of curiosity, where can I find the list/figures of soldiers that have been discharged because they asked someone if they were gay, called them gay, or a fag, or any other derogatory term, despite their actual orientation? Jared was discharged for violating for the “telling” aspect, however I guarantee you most soldiers violate this daily by calling another soldier a fag… whether jokingly or not, this still violates the law… so should everyone of them be discharged? According to the law, yes they should. If they are going to enforce one side, they need to enforce the other.

      But yes, if anyone can point me to THOSE numbers, I would be greatly obliged.

      Aug 19, 2010 at 8:35 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cape Power
      Cape Power

      TRC- Those are not numbers specifically up for public release. You can see how many people have been discharged under DADT; but not the circumstances. That’s Privacy Act information in a lot of cases.

      Jarod did not tell. He fell into a different category.

      DADT is in actuality Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, Don’t Harass, Don’t Pursue.

      Example: Soldier A calls Soldier B a fag. That is considered sexual harassment which is zero tolerance in the military and Soldier A should be reprimanded. Soldier B cannot be asked if he is homosexual based on that simple statement, nor can an investigation be launched (pursued) based on that.

      A person can be asked and investigation can be persued once minimum amounts of evidence of homosexual behaviours, lifestyle, intent to commit homosexual acts, etc have been discovered.

      Jarod’s phone had; as described by Jarod himself; photos of him and his boyfriend (so it was not a wrong assumption of his homosexuality) in compromising situations…or as he put it “pictures he would not have wanted his boss to see”

      The Navy had every right to search his phone. Now, during that search due to his admitted infraction, the minimum evidence requirement was met. How it exactly played out at that point…well is anyone’s guess. Was he read his Article 31 rights? (Similar to Fifth Admendment) Did he keep his mouth shut until he had a lawyer present? Or did he answer questions, make official statements, written or oral? Who knows?

      No law was broken on the military’s part.

      As for the stats; one word. Google.

      Aug 19, 2010 at 8:55 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • DR
      DR

      DADT needs to go, this is ridiculous. An otherwise capable sailor being discharged over silliness.

      But Jarod, you need to check your stuff before reporting for duty. You forgot about your camera-equipped cell phone?!? The one which happened to have possibly intimate and/or racy pics of you and your boyfriend on it? Really?

      Jarod, you’re not ten, you’re an enlisted serviceman. It’s your responsibility, especially as a gay man with a boyfriend, to make sure you don’t do stupid things like this.

      Aug 19, 2010 at 8:59 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Chelsea
      Chelsea

      Seems there are few people that know the law they are calling unfair.

      Jarod-why would you ALSO want have gotten punished for having your phone on the sub? Did you want a court martial possibility in addition to your already other than honorable discharge? Sounds like they did you a huge favor in not punishing you for the phone discrepancy by not giving you any federal criminal offenses to explain as a civilian.

      Aug 19, 2010 at 9:05 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • jt
      jt

      FAG

      Aug 21, 2010 at 2:13 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Russell
      Russell

      It´s shameful that this happens in America in the 21st century. We pretend to defend democracy and freedom throughout the world and we discriminate our own soldiers? I´m not in the military and I´m not interested in their patriotic bellicose speech as far as I hate war, but that´s another debate. Do our politicians and military leaders think that when our troops are fighting in a hostile land with danger for their lifes, soldiers care if John loves Tom? Doesn´t our Constitution protect citizens of any sort of discrimination? American homophobia still keeps on.

      Sep 1, 2010 at 12:37 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Tony
      Tony

      “The Uniform Code of Military Justice, passed by Congress in 1950 and signed by President Harry S Truman, established the policies and procedures for discharging homosexual service members.” Change the UCMJ, DADT was actually enacted to limit enforcement of the UCMJ, in regards to homosexuality, and recent regulation passed by executive order when Reagan was President.

      If you repealed DADT, then they could ask if you are gay and if you lie, then they can discharge you for lying and if you say you are gay then they can discharge you for being gay. You have to change the regulations before you repeal DADT.

      Oh, you give up your rights to privacy when you join the US Military. You give up many rights in order to serve the country. The policy is actually “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, Don’t Harass, Don’t Pursue.”

      While it should be repealed, DADT actually helped change the opinion of homosexuality in the military. It inspired hundreds of hours of training. I wrote up a couple sailors for making discriminatory remarks about homosexuals. They were disciplined for their discriminatory remarks.

      Sep 25, 2010 at 2:06 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·

    Add your Comment

    Please log in to add your comment

    Need an account? Register It's free and easy.



  • POPULAR ON QUEERTY

    FOLLOW US
     



    GET QUEERTY'S DAILY NEWSLETTER


    FROM AROUND THE WEB

    Copyright 2014 Queerty, Inc.
    Follow Queerty at Queerty.com, twitter.com/queerty and facebook.com/queerty.