“Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” from beyond the grave.
Death of a Gay Soldier - ABC News
Major Alan Rogers was an intelligence officer who trained Iraqi soldiers. An IED in Baghdad killed him while he was out on patrol. On March 14, he was buried in Arlington National Cemetery.
The Washington Post reported at the time that Rogers’ commanding officer wrote to his family: “As God would have it, he shielded two men who probably would have been killed if Alan had not been there.”
According to the Washington Blade, Rogers was also treasurer of the D.C. chapter of the American Veterans for Equal Rights, which works to overturn the ban on gays and lesbians serving openly in the military.
Because Rogers, it turns out, was gay.
Some, such as Andrew Sullivan, have been quite critical of the fact that Rogers’ orientation has been omitted from media accounts of his death.
Writes Andrew: “to enforce the closet even after his death cannot be explained except by a view that somehow being gay is shameful or private. I can see why outing someone who is alive and closeted is unethical; inning someone who is dead and was out is a function of utterly misplaced sensitivity, rooted in well-intentioned but incontrovertible homophobia.”
It may seem strange, but at first I took the other side. Gay or straight doesn’t matter when you gave your life in defense of your country and to save the lives of others; to act as if being gay somehow made his act more noble than it would have been if he was straight is a bit of a double standard, even if it does take a bit more gall to willingly lay down your life for a country that says “I don’t want you.” But he could have gotten out at any time. He could have publicly outed himself beyond his participation in a group striving for equality and been dismissed, and he didn’t. He chose to remain quiet, stay, and serve his country. That, along with how he lost his life, makes Major Rogers someone to be respected.
And it was that line of thinking that turned me around and made me think, “Then maybe yes, people do deserve to know; it was a part of who he was, and it shouldn’t be omitted from his life after his death.” But I still balk at this; maybe it’s my views that we’re so much more than our orientation, and I’m sick of us being boxed in as gay first and everything else after. Major Rogers was far more than a gay man and activist, and yet were those things to be mentioned in his obituary, that’s all that many of the general public would see. They wouldn’t see an honorable man who fought for others, a son, a brother, an uncle, a friend, a compatriot - whatever he was to so many people.
All they would see is a gay man, and the stereotype flung over that like a cloak to hide everything else that he was.
Is it right? No. Does that change that it’s a popular perception that too many of us perpetuate? Unfortunately, no. And would everyone think that about Rogers if his obituary had made mention of his sexuality? Of course not. America isn’t a hive mind and people have diverse perceptions and beliefs, and many people know that being gay isn’t something that you have to hide or be ashamed of - just as many people are violently opposed to it. So I can’t agree or disagree with the decision to leave his sexuality and activism out of his obituary. On one hand it would have given hope to other gay servicemembers, and maybe even shown some of those “don’t ask, don’t tell” proponents that he didn’t ask, he didn’t tell…but he still gave his life for them, and a gay man was just as good as they are.
On the other hand, it could have brought down unnecessary prejudice on his family in a time of grief when they didn’t need to deal with anything more. And in the eyes of many, it would have demoted him from a brave, honorable soldier to “just another fag.” Maybe mentioning it in his obituary would have been an act of defiance against the prejudiced. Maybe it would have been pointless. And maybe it would have just been another nuance on his life, that didn’t make a wave at all.
So I don’t know what to think. I don’t know which way to stand. The only thing I can say for certain is this:
Rest in peace, Major Rogers, and thank you.
Just don’t start playing “Taps”.
Listen to DR Streaming Radio
April 1st, 2008 at 3:35 pm
My first response mirrored your own: he may have been gay, he may have been in the armed services, but why do we need to make him a “gay soldier” instead of just a brave soldier? He fought and died for the people of this country and was recognized as the hero he truly was. In life, he was gay, and he fought for the rights of fellow gay armed service members. We live in a world where he can’t be a “brave, gay soldier” because of the prejudices and ignorance of our fellow human beings. It sucks, but them’s the cards we’ve been dealt.
Mr. Sullivan also needs to realize that the family also has a concern in this. If they had advertised the fact that Maj. Rogers was gay, who knows what Phelps and his clan of crazies would do? Hell, who knows what they’ll do to the poor man’s grave now that they know? I don’t even want to imagine.
The best we can do is start changing people’s perceptions on a day-by-day basis. Come in, impress everyone with how polite and competent you are at your work, at your school, at life in general, and let people make their own decisions about you. Prove to them that we aren’t the vapid, moronic monsters the other side claims we are, and it’ll all work out in a generation or two.
Don’t, however, forcibly shove everyone and anyone’s face in the fact that you’re gay, and special because of that. No one is special; not you, not me, not even Adri *grins* so stop acting like the mere fact you’re attracted to the same sex organs makes you a special snowflake and come join the rest of us in reality land. We have cake!
April 3rd, 2008 at 6:57 am
I’m one of approximately a dozen gay or lesbian friends who spoke with the Post about Alan. I can assure you, none of us tried to “forcibly shove everyone and anyone’s face in the fact” that Alan was gay. All we did was share our own fond memories of Alan’s tremendous work with our organization, how he had a knack for bringing diverse groups of people together into a cohesive community. I can only speak for myself, but I personally wouldn’t have cared if they ran the story without specifically mentioning that Alan was gay. What I expected, however, was that our friendships with and admiration for Alan would be honored and cherished along with everyone else’s–just one of many facets, though an important one, of Alan’s remarkable life. It was the Post that “forcibly shoved” Alan into the closet by meticulously excising nearly 2 years of his life. In the story that ran, not a one of us were quoted on ANY topic. It’s as if our relationship with Alan had never existed. We felt this was tremendously disrespectful to Alan and are confident that this is not what he would have wanted.
As far as his relatives go, they were distant relatives and not really in contact with him. Everyone agrees that, to Alan, his friends were his family. They also initially told us they were okay with what we had to say about him, and then later changed their minds.
April 3rd, 2008 at 1:02 pm
Lara,
Thanks for stopping by and offering an inside perspective on the story. It opens up a lot more and adds a better perspective to Major Rogers’ life. I really appreciate the time you took, and I’m sorry for your loss.
-Adri
April 4th, 2008 at 4:58 am
I’m a straight woman, and my acquantances and friends in real-time are mostly straight (to my knowlege), so I don’t have a personal perspective on this. However, I read something somebody once said that made me understand why it was important for the article to include Major Rogers’ orientation. The person said that when featuring gay people for human interest stories the gay element is often white washed out, but when it can be sensationalised, such as when politicians cheat, or criminals turn out to be gay, then it’s very clearly stated. So, in order to have a fair representation, especially in areas where most people are closeted, it’s important to acknowlege when heroes are gay.
April 4th, 2008 at 2:12 pm
Lara, I apologize. I didn’t know all the details of the situation and spoke using assumptions. In the situation you described, it was most certainly a whitewash. That being the case, I would be livid if I were you. That they took the time and gathered all that information about him from you and just ended up ignoring it all so he would fit the “norm” is freaking ridiculous. Again, I’m sorry that I took such a firm stance without knowing what they did to you and his friends.