AccueilGroupesDiscussionsPlusTendances
Site de recherche
Ce site utilise des cookies pour fournir nos services, optimiser les performances, pour les analyses, et (si vous n'êtes pas connecté) pour les publicités. En utilisant Librarything, vous reconnaissez avoir lu et compris nos conditions générales d'utilisation et de services. Votre utilisation du site et de ses services vaut acceptation de ces conditions et termes.

Résultats trouvés sur Google Books

Cliquer sur une vignette pour aller sur Google Books.

Chargement...

Unfriendly Fire: How the Gay Ban Undermines the Military and Weakens America (2009)

par Nathaniel Frank

Autres auteurs: Voir la section autres auteur(e)s.

MembresCritiquesPopularitéÉvaluation moyenneMentions
1011268,650 (4.4)1
When the "don't ask, don't tell" policy emerged as a political compromise under Bill Clinton in 1993, it only ended up worsening the destructive gay ban that had been on the books since World War II. Drawing on more than a decade of research and hundreds of interviews, Nathaniel Frank exposes the military's policy toward guys and lesbians.… (plus d'informations)
Aucun
Chargement...

Inscrivez-vous à LibraryThing pour découvrir si vous aimerez ce livre

Actuellement, il n'y a pas de discussions au sujet de ce livre.

» Voir aussi la mention 1

Dr. Frank provides a compelling look at how the ban on gays in the military hurts the country's security and makes it more difficult for America to fight terrorists. He describes how many people in the military who were for the ban are now against it. The military has fired Arabic translators, counterintelligence specialists, and others who are desperately needed.

Dr. Frank examines and rejects the arguments of the supporters of the gay ban, including the idea that homosexuals serving openly will hurt morale and military readiness. He points out that many gays have served openly in the miitary with no problems. Also, many foreign countries including Canada, Great Britain, and Australia have lifted their gay bans and have had found that homosexuals were easily integrated into their units.

Dr. Frank writes about some of the tragedies that have occured because of homophobia in the military-one man was beaten to death with a baseball bat. Other gays and lesbians endured physical abuse and threats. Gays and lesbians, or those suspected of being gay and lesbian, can be investigated and discharged. ( )
  bab77 | May 21, 2009 |
aucune critique | ajouter une critique

» Ajouter d'autres auteur(e)s (1 possible)

Nom de l'auteurRôleType d'auteurŒuvre ?Statut
Frank, NathanielAuteurauteur principaltoutes les éditionsconfirmé
Conner, ElizabethConcepteur de la couvertureauteur secondairequelques éditionsconfirmé
Vous devez vous identifier pour modifier le Partage des connaissances.
Pour plus d'aide, voir la page Aide sur le Partage des connaissances [en anglais].
Titre canonique
Titre original
Titres alternatifs
Date de première publication
Personnes ou personnages
Lieux importants
Évènements importants
Films connexes
Épigraphe
Informations provenant du Partage des connaissances anglais. Modifiez pour passer à votre langue.
Make us choose the harder right instead of the easier wrong, and never to be
content with a half truth when the whole truth can be won.

—Cadet prayer, United States Military Academy at West Point
Dédicace
Premiers mots
Informations provenant du Partage des connaissances anglais. Modifiez pour passer à votre langue.
Ever since the Revolutionary War, men have been drummed out of the U.S. military for homosexual acts.
Citations
Informations provenant du Partage des connaissances anglais. Modifiez pour passer à votre langue.
Why do so many Americans oppose letting gays serve in the U.S. military? What were they against? What were they afraid of? And what were they hoping for or trying to accomplish? Beneath the instinctive hostility to gay soldiers, what was the real source of opposition to officially welcoming gay and lesbian Americans into the armed forces? The short answer is, in a word, morality. Millions of Americans found (and still find) homosexuality either viscerally repugnant or at least vaguely wrong. It logically follows that if something is bad, it should not be inflicted on an eminent American institution, particularly one that relies on discipline and a heightened sense of its own virtue as an antidote to the unavoidable fact that it’s ultimately about killing people.
While Powell was scrupulous about remaining high-minded, he never succeeded at explaining how the presence of gays would undermine order and discipline, and he never marshaled any actual evidence that gays hurt the often invoked notion of “unit cohesion.” In fact, he barely even tried, opting instead to simply assert the point as a given. Without proof that open gays harmed the military, Powell’s argument boiled down to this: Many straight people prefer not to be considered attractive to gay people.

Of course, military life was all about doing things you might prefer not to: wandering through a hostile war zone in the Iraqi desert in stratospheric temperatures; dismantling deadly IEDs blocking the path of your convoy; literally giving up a limb to defend your country. Service members don’t generally enjoy this stuff, even as they may embrace it as a part of their duty. Some might even regard these grim realities as quite a bit worse than showering with an admirer. By fixating on this particular hardship and suggesting that this alone would break morale, Powell gave his imprimatur not only to the preferences of straight soldiers not to serve with gays but to the notion that there was indeed, something wrong, something unacceptable, about homosexuality. Otherwise, serving with gays would have become just one of the hundreds of things men and women are required to do to become good, disciplined soldiers.
Derniers mots
Informations provenant du Partage des connaissances anglais. Modifiez pour passer à votre langue.
(Cliquez pour voir. Attention : peut vendre la mèche.)
Notice de désambigüisation
Directeur de publication
Courtes éloges de critiques
Informations provenant du Partage des connaissances anglais. Modifiez pour passer à votre langue.
Langue d'origine
Informations provenant du Partage des connaissances anglais. Modifiez pour passer à votre langue.
DDC/MDS canonique
LCC canonique

Références à cette œuvre sur des ressources externes.

Wikipédia en anglais (3)

When the "don't ask, don't tell" policy emerged as a political compromise under Bill Clinton in 1993, it only ended up worsening the destructive gay ban that had been on the books since World War II. Drawing on more than a decade of research and hundreds of interviews, Nathaniel Frank exposes the military's policy toward guys and lesbians.

Aucune description trouvée dans une bibliothèque

Description du livre
Résumé sous forme de haïku

Discussion en cours

Aucun

Couvertures populaires

Vos raccourcis

Évaluation

Moyenne: (4.4)
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4 3
4.5
5 2

Est-ce vous ?

Devenez un(e) auteur LibraryThing.

 

À propos | Contact | LibraryThing.com | Respect de la vie privée et règles d'utilisation | Aide/FAQ | Blog | Boutique | APIs | TinyCat | Bibliothèques historiques | Critiques en avant-première | Partage des connaissances | 204,498,178 livres! | Barre supérieure: Toujours visible