A blue release (also known as "bb> blue ticket ") is an administrative military disposal form previously issued by the United States beginning in 1916. It is not honorable or dishonorable. The blue ticket becomes an escape option for commanders who seek to remove homosexual service members from the ranks. They are also discharged disproportionately to African-Americans.
Service members who make a blue escape are subjected to discrimination in civilian life. They denied the benefits of G.I. Bill by the Veterans Administration and have trouble finding work because the entrepreneur is aware of the negative connotations of the blue discharge. After heavy criticism in the media - especially the black press, due to the high percentage of African-Americans who received the blue release - and in Congress, the blue release was stopped in 1947, replaced by two new classifications: general and undesirable.
Video Blue discharge
History
A blue discharge was made in 1916 to replace the previous two discharge classifications, unauthorized administration disposal and "unclassified" disposal. The debit is printed on blue paper, that's the name. They are also sometimes called "blue tickets". One initial use of blue discharge was for registered service members to fight in World War I while underage, but this practice was abolished by law and all discharges were upgraded to honor.
Maps Blue discharge
Association with homosexuality
The United States military has a long-standing policy that service members known to be homosexual or engaging in homosexual behavior are military tribunals for sodomy, imprisonment and dismissed disrespect. However, with the mobilization of troops following the entry of the United States into World War II, it became impractical to convene a military officer council ordered by the court and some commanders began issuing administrative discharge instead. Several waves of reforms addressing homosexual handling in the military resulted in a 1944 policy directive calling on homosexuals to commit to military hospitals, examined by psychiatrists, and disposed of under Rule 615-360, section 8 as "unfit for service". It is not known exactly how many gay and lesbian members are given a blue discharge under this rule, but in 1946 the Army estimated that they had spent between 49,000 and 68,000 blue releases, with about 5,000 of them excluded for homosexuals, The blue runaway homosexual sea is about 4,000. The time period covered by these estimates is unclear.
Psychiatrists responsible for creating and implementing screening procedures to exclude homosexuals from the military service were initially supported to give gay member blue discharges. However, when they learned of the difficulties facing blue ticket holders in civilian life, they urged the military to stop the exercise. William C. Menninger, who served as Director of the Division of Psychiatric Consultants for Army Surgeons General of the United States from 1944 to 1946, tried to persuade the military to issue honorable release to members of gay services who did not commit any crime during their military service.
One press report says the purpose of an administrative blue disposal, "an unkind dispossession but based on the habits or traits of the individual who made his continuation in undesirable service", is the need to return the army to civilian life as soon as possible: "To get a non- -disabled back to the nation's economic life with little delays and possible red tape, and to help him solve his own personal problems such as unemployment, educational or financial opportunities. "
Discrimination
The Veterans Administration (VA), in charge of applying the provisions of G.I. Bill, denied the advantages for blue runaway veterans, despite Bill's explicit language which only makes unreasonable stopping excuses for refusing the benefit of a veteran. In 1945, the VA issued a directive that all blue releases for homosexuality would be rejected. On December 22, 1955, the United States Court of Appeals for the Circuit District of Columbia rejected an appeal from Raymond W. Longernecker, which G.I rejected. The benefit of the bill by VA because of its blue discharge. The court found that the VA had the wisdom of giving alimony and that Congress had specifically closed the court from putting it aside. Nevertheless, the Court noted that the rejection of benefits should only occur if Longernecker is dismissed in disrespect and that VA Administrator acts without authority in treating blue discharge as if dishonorable.
Most companies require job applicants who have served in the military to present their work papers as part of the application process. Blue runaway veteran has difficulty in getting a job because many entrepreneurs are realizing that blue discharge means that the holder is considered undesirable. The unknowing entrepreneur has access to the list of Partition Program Numbers or "round" number used by the military to classify disposals. At least four round numbers indicate gay related discharge.
Congress has expressed concern about the possible misuse of blue discharge when it begins work on G.I. Bill in 1944. In a discussion of the details of legislation, the American Legion insisted on the special provision to benefit the veteran dismissed under any circumstances other than dishonorable. Legion believes a large number of veterans have been given a blue and other less respectable release for reasons that are considered unreasonable or trivial. In testimony before the United States Senate, Rear Admiral Randall Jacobs strongly opposed this provision on the grounds that it would spoil the spirit and eliminate the incentive to maintain a good service record. Senator Bennett Champ Clark, a sponsor of the bill, dismissed his concerns, calling them "some of the most stupid and unclear objections that could be raised". Clark goes on to say:
The army provides a blue discharge, an unauthorized disposal, to those who have no faults other than they do not show sufficient skills for military service. I say that when the government designs a man from civilian life and puts him in military service... and, after that, because the person does not show enough skill to give him a blue escape, or an escape without honor, that fact should not be allowed to prevent people from receive the benefits that the army generally entitles.
G.I. Bill also provides a review board to review the appeals of all dismissals other than the dishonorable. From 1945 to early 1947, these councils were routinely upgraded in honor of the blue escape of homosexual service members who did not commit any known sexual acts during their military service. About one-third of all blue discharge reviewed improved to be respectable.
Black press crusade
Another minority group that disproportionately releases blue releases is African-Americans. Of the 48,603 blue discharges issued by the Army between 1 December 1941, and 30 June 1945, 10,806 were issued to African-Americans, or 22.23% of all blue discharges. At this time, African Americans constitute 6.5% of the Army.
In October 1945, the Black-interest newspaper The Pittsburgh Courier launched a crusade against liberation and its offense, calling the dismissal of "the abominable instrument that should not have been done against the American Army", and rebuked the Army. to "allow prejudiced officers to use it as a way of punishing Negro soldiers who do not like the irresistible special conditions". The Courier specifically notes the discrimination faced by homosexual blue tickets, calling them "'unfortunate' Nations... being preyed by blue discharges" and demanding to know "why the Army chose to punish those who ' unlucky 'who seem to need the most benefit of the Army and the opportunity to become a better citizen under the educational benefits of the GI Bill of Rights.
The Courier printed instructions on how to appeal blue debits and alert readers not to receive blue tickets from the service due to the negative effects that may be on their lives.
In addition to Courier, other groups and institutions condemning the use of punishment from blue runners including the American Legion, the National Association for the Progress of Color People, the Congress of Industrial Organizations, and Veterans. Association of Benevolence. In the US Senate, chairman of the Senate Veterans Committee, Senator Edwin C. Johnson (D-Colorado), read the editorial Courier in a note.On October 29, 1945, noted that blue discharge means veterans have not yet been punished and not separated from the military without being able to defend himself, he said: "There should be no twilight zone between innocence and guilt. Blue discharges will definitely be a headache for Congress from now on. "
House House Report on blue release
Responding to reports of the different treatment of veterans with blue tickets, the House Military Affairs Committee appointed a special committee to review the procedures of the Veterans Administration. The Committee, headed by Rep. Carl T. Durham (D-NC), issued his report formally called "Investigation of National War Efforts", commonly known as "Blue Discharges", on January 30, 1946. The committee expressed his admiration. that anyone with a blue discharge would risk further stigmatization by speaking out against discrimination:
Keep in mind that even moderate number of complaints in this sort of thing is significant. For a person to make such a complaint in his own case implies that he feels that injustice is so great that he is willing to risk publishing the stigma of having been expelled from the Army in a state of disgrace. For every rapport there are many more who feel the same sense of injustice but prefer to bury their pain as much as possible to be forgotten.
In examining the history of the blue runaway veteran case, the committee found that "the procedure was appropriate for dismissal based on prejudice and antagonism". Furthermore, the committee found that the effects of blue runaway "are slightly different from discharged discharges... dispossessed people find it difficult to get or keep a job in. The people's suspicions are aroused against him, all the worse in some way to bring the atmosphere of mystery." The report says that "nothing could more clearly prove the anomalous and illogical and unpleasant nature of the blue runaway than this Veterans Administration policy". The committee called the system to handle veterans with blue tickets, "extortion between war ministries and veterans administration" and took the agency for the task of assuming "the right to separate the sheep from the goats" and "to impose moral judgments." about the history of any soldier ".
To reform the committee's recommended disposal system:
- Automatic review for all blue dumps
- That the Army was asked to show that he made a lot of efforts to rehabilitate service members before issuing a blue debit
- The right to advise service members is given a blue exemption, whether provided by the military or personal advisor
- A copy of the procedural rules regarding the blue release process is provided upon request
- That any debit that does not specify the quality of service status is clear that it is not unlawful
The committee also recommended changing the disposal system to four classifications: respectable and dishonorable, without a change in their definition; "in honorable condition" to replace blue discharge; and general, to cover the separation by mistake.
Aftermath
Despite the Committee's report, the VA continues to discriminate against homosexual blue tickets, renewed the 1945 directive in 1946 and again in 1949. The blue release was terminated on July 1, 1947, and two new, general and undesirable positions took their place. The general disposal is considered to be under respectable conditions - different from "respectable discharge" - and unwanted disposal under conditions other than honorable - is different from "dishonorable dismissal". At the same time, the Army changed its rules to ensure that members of the gay and lesbian services would not be eligible for a general release. Those found guilty of involvement in homosexual behavior still receive an unloved release, while those identified as homosexual but not homosexual acts are now receiving unwanted relief. In the 1970s, a non-homosexual service member would tend to accept general dismissal, while those found to be involved in homosexual sex tend to receive unwanted release. Members of the gay service continue to receive a disproportionate percentage of the undesired discharges issued. This was the status quo until it was replaced in 1993 by a policy commonly known as "do not ask, do not tell".
It has been argued that large gay populations in port cities such as San Francisco, Chicago and New York City are partly the result of a blue run. This theory confirms that many blue-gay veteran tickets from smaller urban or rural areas feel they can not return to their home communities because the shame associated with their exile moves into larger areas with established or only live gay subcultures in the city through which they returned to the United States.
Note
References
Source of the article : Wikipedia
0 Comments