Three quarters of military could not care less about repealing DADT

Timothy Kincaid

August 18th, 2010

It is becoming increasingly evident that the most significant disturbance that the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell could have on the morale of the troops may well be the annoyance of having to fill out a survey. Because they certainly don’t seem to be in any rush to inform the Pentagon of their concerns, if they have any.

A few weeks ago, the military brass had to come out and make statements encouraging soldiers to fill out their surveys. It was very important so that they could “understand possible impacts associated by repeal of the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell law.” And at that time, they only had a 10% response rate.

Well, the deadline has passed and not many responded to the DOD’s appeal. (Wendy City Times)

Department of Defense spokeswoman Cynthia Smith told CNN that just two days before the Aug. 15 deadline about 104,000 of the 400,000 100-question surveys had been returned.

This is about the expected response rate for a long survey. But this survey was special; it was the opportunity for military personnel to weigh in on a matter which was before Congress and which some Senators are convinced is of great importance to them.

And they really just couldn’t care less. Alexander Nicholson, executive director of Servicemembers United, said,

“From what we are hearing, troops have little interest in this survey and simply just don’t care about this policy change,” he said. “While the Department of Defense and Westat [ the research firm behind the survey ] are spinning the low response rate to the ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ survey as expected and sufficient, neither are disclosing the fact that the military leaders have had to put significant pressure on troops on multiple occasions to even get this level of response.”

Nicholson added, “Some commanders and senior leaders have even told subordinates that participation is mandatory. These occurrences further degrade the credibility of this survey’s methodology and violate ethical standards that prevent researchers from compelling respondents to participate in survey research.”

Although Congress is fretting over the horrible possibility of troop morale being decimated, the men and women of the military have looked at this whole conflict and answered. With a collective yawn.

Grant

August 18th, 2010

Timothy – excellent article as always, and very interesting to note that the “boots on the ground” really don’t give DADT much importance in their lives. I wonder though if the ones who did respond are those most vehemently opposed to overturning DADT? I hope not.

Just a teeny nit to pick though – I think you mean troop “morale” rather than “moral”? ;)

Timothy Kincaid

August 18th, 2010

Grant,

Thanks. Yep, I meant morale. Sigh, my spelling is just dreadful sometimes.

Lucrece

August 18th, 2010

You should be more worried than concerned.

It’s obvious why so little surveys were turned in, and it’s not apathy.

Those surveys had 100+ questions. Anyone with a brain and knowledge on survey conduction knows that a vast amount of people will simply not bother with a 100 question survey, and the sample becomes tainted by those who do fill the survey.

The turned in surveys will be from people who feel invested in the process; and if history is to be revisited, you should know that those who support us tend to be quite bland and fickle in making efforts, whereas those against us are well organized by their churches.

Furthermore, just think how much influence homophobic army chaplains had on convincing their flock to turn in the polls, while the more apathetic youth that is usually on our side would rather make youtube videos or foll around.

Lynn David

August 18th, 2010

75% might not care about DADT, but they didn’t vote for us by completing their questionaire. The 25+% who did fill it out will be have the say.

daftpunkydavid

August 18th, 2010

another teeny nit to pick… did you mean to say that they COULD care less (as opposed to couldn’t care less)? it seems the former fits your argument better. ok, done nitpicking.

Timothy Kincaid

August 18th, 2010

DPdavid,

hmmm…

Well if you COULD care less, then it means you are now caring more than is absolutely necessary.

And if you COULDN’T care less, that means you don’t care even a little bit. You care the very least possible.

So I think “could not care less” is probably better.

daftpunkydavid

August 19th, 2010

tim,

you’re absolutely right! in my own convoluted way, i had come to believe that if i could care less, then i really had other priorities, and therefore could shift attention to other matters. so the thing i could care less about was really something that did not have much importance.

but it turns out that there’s much more to that phrase than i had thought…

from dictionary.com:

Which is correct: I could care less or I couldn’t care less?

The expression I could not care less originally meant ‘it would be impossible for me to care less than I do because I do not care at all’. It was originally a British saying and came to the US in the 1950s. It is senseless to transform it into the now-common I could care less. If you could care less, that means you care at least a little. The original is quite sarcastic and the other form is clearly nonsense. The inverted form I could care less was coined in the US and is found only here, recorded in print by 1966. The question is, something caused the negative to vanish even while the original form of the expression was still very much in vogue and available for comparison – so what was it? There are other American English expressions that have a similar sarcastic inversion of an apparent sense, such as Tell me about it!, which usually means ‘Don’t tell me about it, because I know all about it already’. The Yiddish I should be so lucky!, in which the real sense is often ‘I have no hope of being so lucky’, has a similar stress pattern with the same sarcastic inversion of meaning as does I could care less.

anyway, thanks for helping me improve my english!

MIhangel apYrs

August 19th, 2010

speaking as a Brit:
“I couldn’t care less” is what we use, and the alternative would appear meaningless to us UNLESS the intonation is correct “I could care leSS?”

anyway a bit of a detour there….

As regards the polling: it will only inform decision-making if it validates the decision they want to make!

justsearching

August 19th, 2010

The troops should never have been asked to begin with. Also, it’s probable the ones most bothered by the possibility of overturning DADT are the ones that will fill out this ridiculous survey. The results don’t matter much either because the right-wingers will either highlight or ignore what the troops said to suit their own agendas.

Leave A Comment

All comments reflect the opinions of commenters only. They are not necessarily those of anyone associated with Box Turtle Bulletin. Comments are subject to our Comments Policy.

(Required)
(Required, never shared)

PLEASE NOTE: All comments are subject to our Comments Policy.

 

Latest Posts

Emphasis Mine

Today's Agenda Is Brought To You By...

Today In History, 1980: Tickets, Tux, and a Court Order -- A Male Couple Attends Senior Prom

Born On This Day, 1926: Christine Jorgenson

Today's Agenda Is Brought To You By...

Today In History, 1965: Second White House Protest

Today In History, 1981: "Polyester" Premieres

Today In History, 1987: Barney Frank Comes Out

Featured Reports

What Are Little Boys Made Of?

In this original BTB Investigation, we unveil the tragic story of Kirk Murphy, a four-year-old boy who was treated for “cross-gender disturbance” in 1970 by a young grad student by the name of George Rekers. This story is a stark reminder that there are severe and damaging consequences when therapists try to ensure that boys will be boys.

Slouching Towards Kampala: Uganda’s Deadly Embrace of Hate

When we first reported on three American anti-gay activists traveling to Kampala for a three-day conference, we had no idea that it would be the first report of a long string of events leading to a proposal to institute the death penalty for LGBT people. But that is exactly what happened. In this report, we review our collection of more than 500 posts to tell the story of one nation’s embrace of hatred toward gay people. This report will be updated continuously as events continue to unfold. Check here for the latest updates.

Paul Cameron’s World

In 2005, the Southern Poverty Law Center wrote that “[Paul] Cameron’s ‘science’ echoes Nazi Germany.” What the SPLC didn”t know was Cameron doesn’t just “echo” Nazi Germany. He quoted extensively from one of the Final Solution’s architects. This puts his fascination with quarantines, mandatory tattoos, and extermination being a “plausible idea” in a whole new and deeply disturbing light.

From the Inside: Focus on the Family’s “Love Won Out”

On February 10, I attended an all-day “Love Won Out” ex-gay conference in Phoenix, put on by Focus on the Family and Exodus International. In this series of reports, I talk about what I learned there: the people who go to these conferences, the things that they hear, and what this all means for them, their families and for the rest of us.

Prologue: Why I Went To “Love Won Out”
Part 1: What’s Love Got To Do With It?
Part 2: Parents Struggle With “No Exceptions”
Part 3: A Whole New Dialect
Part 4: It Depends On How The Meaning of the Word "Change" Changes
Part 5: A Candid Explanation For "Change"

The Heterosexual Agenda: Exposing The Myths

At last, the truth can now be told.

Using the same research methods employed by most anti-gay political pressure groups, we examine the statistics and the case studies that dispel many of the myths about heterosexuality. Download your copy today!

And don‘t miss our companion report, How To Write An Anti-Gay Tract In Fifteen Easy Steps.

Testing The Premise: Are Gays A Threat To Our Children?

Anti-gay activists often charge that gay men and women pose a threat to children. In this report, we explore the supposed connection between homosexuality and child sexual abuse, the conclusions reached by the most knowledgeable professionals in the field, and how anti-gay activists continue to ignore their findings. This has tremendous consequences, not just for gay men and women, but more importantly for the safety of all our children.

Straight From The Source: What the “Dutch Study” Really Says About Gay Couples

Anti-gay activists often cite the “Dutch Study” to claim that gay unions last only about 1½ years and that the these men have an average of eight additional partners per year outside of their steady relationship. In this report, we will take you step by step into the study to see whether the claims are true.

The FRC’s Briefs Are Showing

Tony Perkins’ Family Research Council submitted an Amicus Brief to the Maryland Court of Appeals as that court prepared to consider the issue of gay marriage. We examine just one small section of that brief to reveal the junk science and fraudulent claims of the Family “Research” Council.

Daniel Fetty Doesn’t Count

Daniel FettyThe FBI’s annual Hate Crime Statistics aren’t as complete as they ought to be, and their report for 2004 was no exception. In fact, their most recent report has quite a few glaring holes. Holes big enough for Daniel Fetty to fall through.