military to provide "cohesiveness." Society bent to accommodate homosexuality. The military, however, cannot bend if it is to effectively carry out its duties. The realities of military life include working closely while on duty, but the true intimacies "are to be traced to less bellicose surroundings-to the barracks, the orderly room, the mess hall. If indeed the military can lay claim to any sense of `organic unity,' it will be found in the intimacy of platoon and company life." The military demands an extreme amount of cohesiveness, and this is very much reinforced in barracks life. You must sleep with, eat with, and share facilities with your fellow platoon members. Life in the barracks is extremely intimate. Men must share rooms together, and showers are public also. Having homosexuals be part of this structure violates this cohesiveness. Men and women are kept in separate barracks much for the same reasons. However, the true purpose behind barring gay service members is how the individuals who are part of the military feel about them. Members of the military are more conservatively minded people, but, moreover, they are overwhelmingly opposed to having homosexuals among their ranks. To then force these individuals to serve with gays only undermines the morale of the military. And when morale is undermined, the effectiveness of the military drops as well. The leadership of the military has always been persistent in its position-"Up and down the chain of command, you'll find the military leadership favors the ban.". And, as one navy lieutenant put it: "The military is a life-and-death business, not an equal opportunity employer." No one is doubting that gays have served in the military. Ever since Baron Frederich von Steuben (a renowned Prussian military-mind and known homosexual) served as a Major General in the Continental Army, there have been homosexuals serving in the military. Even today there exists a Gay American Legion post...
