Meet Brig. Gen. Tammy Smith, the first openly gay U.S. general

Last week, Brigadier General Tammy Smith became the first openly gay officer of flag rank in the United States army. She was promoted in an Aug. 10 ceremony at Arlington at which Brig. Gen. Smith's wife, Tracey Hepner, pinned the star onto her uniform.

news.yahoo.com...

"While the [Dept. of Defense] position is that orientation is a private matter, participating with family in traditional ceremonies such as the promotion is both common and expected of a leader," Smith said in a statement. "Looking at the photos of Tracey's joy as she pins the star on my shoulder is a memory that will imprint my heart forever. Her support keeps me Army Strong."

Gotta admit, on one hand I see nothing wrong with it, but on the other, I am torn. Who could have ever foreseen gay influence residing at the very top offices of our military?

But this is a great thing! I mean those who stand to gain are the gays themselves looking at all those luscious bodies in the showers of same sex soldiers! Whoopee!

Seriously though, this does tug at some deep rooted feelings I guess I have being a straight male. I am trying to understand, but it is hard for me. What kind of influence can this person exert from the top down to the soldiers?

What kind of image does this present to the world about our military? Does it weaken that image in any way?

reply to post by TrueAmerican

Originally posted by TrueAmerican
Who could have ever foreseen gay influence residing at the very top offices of our military?

You'd be surprised to find out how many people are gay and feel that they have to "pass" as straight to be accepted by society. There are gay cops, teachers, firemen and women. Almost everyone knows someone who's gay, even if they aren't aware of it.

What kind of influence can this person exert from the top down to the soldiers?

I'm sure it's no different than the influence she's exerted so far. Be a good military person, operate with integrity, follow orders, love your country, etc... Why would a gay general exert any different influence than a straight one?

What kind of image does this present to the world about our military? Does it weaken that image in any way?

Only the ignorant see gay people as "weak". This is the image of a strong woman who is dedicated to her country. Who she is attracted to is no more an issue than who ANY general is attracted to.

Bravo to her for coming out and bravo to Obama for repealing the archaic and ignorant "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy!

Should it really rate a mention, so what if she is gay?
do we cheer when a hetrosexual gets promoted?

Equality means making it a nothing issue, her performance as a leader has nothing to do with her performance in bed.

reply to post by munkey66


If it is a nothing issue, then why is it plastered all over every media outlet from here to Timbuktu?

Originally posted by TrueAmerican

Gotta admit, on one hand I see nothing wrong with it, but on the other, I am torn. Who could have ever foreseen gay influence residing at the very top offices of our military?

Ah yes, the gay influence! She's going to make the military FABULOUS!

So you are saying the military has had this special straight influence for years? It's the military. It's about killing people not screwing them lol.

reply to post by TrueAmerican

What kind of influence can this person exert from the top down to the soldiers?

Hopefully she will inspire tolerance, understanding and camaraderie amongst those in the military who are afraid of gay men and women.

I applaud her appointment – to see a gay woman acknowledged at such a high level sends a positive message to young people in the GLBTIQ community that their sexuality does not have to be a barrier to achieving success.

reply to post by TrueAmerican


It shouldn't be a "nothing" issue. This is how a society learns acceptance. The reason gay people are still discriminated against is that 1. the law doesn't support equal treatment and 2. people fear the unknown. Reporting on this addresses point 2. Making sure everyone knows that we have (at LEAST) one gay general (I'm sure there are more) helps the general public to understand that gay people aren't as "different" or "scary" as they once thought.

Yes, it's the media's way of actually educating the public for once. People who make judgments against homosexuals do so because they are uneducated, unfamiliar and/or afraid. The more gay people who come out publicly, the more educated and accepting the public will be.

It's a Good Thing.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
It shouldn't be a "nothing" issue. This is how a society learns acceptance.

Handed out I'm sure on the talking point memos to every major media outlet from an administration hellbent on pushing the issue. I think it was more of a non-issue with "Don't ask, Don't Tell" in place. At least that way it was private.

By the way, anyone familiar with this?

www.thepinkswastika.com...

I say, screw it all, and out yourself as a "Pansexual" to cover all of your bases. Just one of the reasons why main stream America has had a difficult time accepting the Gay movement. The goalposts are continually moved as people are continually being redefined and sorted according to their tastes.

First it was LGB then LGBT now its LGBTP?? I'm just as confused as the Pansexuals.

Texas’ only openly LGBT legislator will be nation’s 1st out pansexual elected official, after saying she rejects both ‘lesbian’ and ‘bisexual’

In an exclusive interview with Dallas Voice this week, Gonzalez said she identifies as “pansexual,” an orientation many would call bisexual, except pansexuals don’t believe in a gender binary and can be attracted to all gender identities. Gonzalez said she doesn’t believe in a gender binary because “gender identity isn’t the defining part of my attraction.”

After coming out as bisexual at 21, Gonzalez said a few years later she started dating “gender-queer” and transgender people, and later identified as pan.

“As I started to recognize the gender spectrum and dated along the gender spectrum, I was searching for words that connected to that reality, for words that embraced the spectrum,” she said. “At the time I didn’t feel as if the term bisexual was encompassing of a gender spectrum that I was dating and attracted to.”

www.dallasvoice.com...

Whatever... Gender Spectrum...Gender Binary... Just admit you're still confused...

As for Gen. Tammy Smith. Congratulations on your gayness. More important. Congratulations for achieving the well regarded rank of General. A big achievement for ANYONE!!!

Originally posted by TrueAmerican

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
It shouldn't be a "nothing" issue. This is how a society learns acceptance.

Handed out I'm sure on the talking point memos to every major media outlet from an administration hellbent on pushing the issue. I think it was more of a non-issue with "Don't ask, Don't Tell" in place. At least that way it was private.

By the way, anyone familiar with this?

www.thepinkswastika.com...

edit on Tue Aug 14th 2012 by TrueAmerican because: (no reason given)

Oh god, don't bring that heap of discredited crap into this.
en.wikipedia.org...

As for "Don't Ask, Don't Tell", no it didn't keep it private. People were thrown out for being gay during that time period.

reply to post by TrueAmerican

Originally posted by TrueAmerican
I think it was more of a non-issue with "Don't ask, Don't Tell" in place. At least that way it was private.

Yes, I'm sure it was a non-issue for people who want to put their heads in the sand and pretend that gay people are a strange sect of deviants who segregate themselves into their own little enclaves. That way, everyone is "safe"... This announcement lets us know that the person you sit beside on the bus might be gay. The person who cuts your hair, cares for your children, attends your church might be gay.

For gay people, however, DADT was still an issue. Hiding their true selves and pretending that they're straight, so the straight people could feel more comfortable, isn't exactly a "non-issue" for them.

I think it's hilarious that you played the gay-Nazi card! Jesus!

Originally posted by jibeho
I say, screw it all, and out yourself as a "Pansexual" to cover all of your bases. Just one of the reasons why main stream America has had a difficult time accepting the Gay movement. The goalposts are continually moved as people are continually being redefined and sorted according to their tastes.

I can see why it's confusing, but it actually makes perfect sense.

There is actually divisions in the 'gay movement' on how to deal with these things. It may surprise, but there are parts of the gay movement that don't support transsexuals and, in fact, oppose them. It's the same that some intersex persons actually don't like trans people for various reasons.

In this instance, pansexual applies to intersex and trans persons. Many bisexuals wouldn't be interested in an intersex or trans person ergo the term pansexual shows acceptance for those types of people. Also it can refer to liking more androgynous styles of persons, or people who challenge the conventions of gender. Many bisexuals enjoy the extreme differences in gender and ergo don't seek androgynous dates.

It doesn't neccessarily mean confused. Though even some gay people assume that's what bisexual means, so you're not alone in your opinions.

As for the reporting on it, it's a first and people will lap it up so the media will jump on it. Will happen less and less with the second, third, and fourth. It's a first, they always get reported.

And I don't think that Iran will be fixing bayonets just because a lesbian scored a ranking position. Women have been in powerful positions in America for years.

reply to post by TrueAmerican


Is she a frontline general or a desk jockey?? Now that is my question not who or what she does between the sheets. Good to see her out in the open.

To those who say that this isn't a big deal, it actually is.

Under "Don't Ask, Don't Tell", she would not have been able to truly enjoy such a promotion, knowing that her partner would not be able to enjoy it publicly without endangering her career.

See where I'm going here?

I wonder if sexual orientation in any way effects this person's job performance?

I wonder if there's anything about this person, other than sexuality that could be used to determine how good they are at their job and what skills they have to put forward?

Oh there is?

Oh, sexual orientation is non issue?

That's what I thought.

~Tenth

reply to post by tothetenthpower

Originally posted by tothetenthpower
Oh, sexual orientation is non issue?

That's what I thought.

My opinion is that it SHOULDN'T be an issue - I mean this woman's influence shouldn't be questioned and scrutinized because of her sexuality, BUT IT IS. Have a look at the OP. Notice the Gay Nazi reference. It CLEARLY is an issue for some people.

The more this kind of thing gets reported, the less and less of an issue it will be. Before you know it, it won't even be reported.

Just like the first black president was an issue. Once we have several black, Latino and women presidents, race and gender will no longer be an issue... And that is how it SHOULD be, but isn't. Yet.

Then we will celebrate the first gay president.

Why would being gay restrict this lady from carrying out her job? If anything this goes to show anyone can achieve anything regardless of race, colour, creed or sexuality. It still bugs me that people seem to place gay people in a different category to straight people as if their alien to the human race. We are are all human and we are all equal. Congratulations to this lady and her partner.

reply to post by TrueAmerican


the spartans practiced homosexuality same for the romans ....and no one questioned their military prowess..alexander the great was known to enjoy a boy or two and no one questioned his prowess either. i say good for her and if she got to the rank of general she obviously knows what shes doing and props for the military for not being jerks about the ceremony

Far more interesting than the homosexuality issue is the apparent dichotomy of a military branch which prohibits women from being in direct combat roles, yet will advance a woman to a position of decision making above those in direct combat... Seems like there may be a disconnect there somewhere.