Letters to the Editor
-
On the other hand...
I won't address the breathtaking hypocrisy demonstrated by the White House in setting any guidelines whatsoever for granting security clearances; events of the last three years have already made that case better than I ever could. I would like to point out, though, that consideration of homosexuality in the granting of security clearances is not a new phenomenon. Traditionally spy organizations have tried to steer clear of gays for what could be considered a pretty good reason: closeted gays are at risk for being blackmailed with threats of exposure into revealing secrets. This isn't new to this White House.
As a gay man who spent 30 years in the closet, I can tell you that fear of exposure is a powerful lever. I was never married to a woman, but having lived openly in the gay community for 10 years I'm very aware that there are many, many closeted, married gays out there with wives and children. Millions. Most of them equate exposure with the loss of everything they have. Sure, it can be argued that in today's world being exposed as gay isn't that big a thing. Tell that to the guy who genuinely loves his wife and kids but secretly meets men to satisfy his same-sex attraction. He'll do just about anything to protect his secret; its exposure could destroy everything he's built. Spy services know this well, and they have good reason to be leery of giving security clearance to someone so vulnerable. It's not pc, of course, but that's the way it is. And as long as our culture remains so hypocritically "moral" and anti-gay (just the way the right likes it), being gay continues to be potentially life-destroying, perpetuating the necessity for this sort of discrimination.