We are not baby-killers. We are not here to forward and execute a policy of discrimination. You are not in danger when we are in uniform. So please, stop staring at us and just smile when we smile at you.

Army R.O.T.C. is a program students participate in throughout their four years of college in order to be commissioned as second lieutenants in the United States Army upon graduation. At Dartmouth, we have two-hour classes on Mondays, two-hour labs on Wednesdays, and two-hour physical training sessions on Fridays. R.O.T.C. time commitments are equivalent to those of a 10A class, but in the middle of the afternoon. We are expected to conform to military regulations whenever we are in uniform and we’re expected to stay in good shape. The overriding sense of commitment required to navigate the unnecessarily complicated routes of participation in R.O.T.C. usually weeds out the wannabe-tough and the would-be brave. That’s “the nature of the beast” in Dartmouth’s Army R.O.T.C., according to former Cadet Captain James Ermarth ‘04. The nature of the beast is both positive and negative. Positive, because we commission officers truly valuable to the Army. Negative, because the program tends to stay small and obscure.

However, there are more formidable recruitment obstacles for R.O.T.C. than self-selection. Two common misconceptions lead to a generally negative view of the Army, and by extension, the R.O.T.C. program. The first regards the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy. The second is that there is a stereotypical “baby-killer” ethic pervading the Army.

The “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy, implemented in ’93, states that although homosexual behavior is still prohibited among members of the armed forces for fear of adverse effects on morale, homosexual service personnel are fundamentally fit for duty and remain eligible for service so long as their sexuality is not revealed. This step away from the military’s previous ban on homosexuals was prompted in large part by, according to U.C. Davis Professor Dr. Gregory Herek, “grassroots civilian opposition to the [Department of Defense’s] policy....Many national organizations had officially condemned the policy and many colleges and universities had banned military recruiters and Reserve Officers Training Corps programs from their campuses in protest of the policy.”

The new law didn’t stop the debate. In ’94, opposition to the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy spurred a series of faculty votes supporting the elimination of R.O.T.C. at Dartmouth. Those who protest “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” argue that it is discriminatory and thus should not be supported by Dartmouth College. However, these opponents, many of whom feel strongly about the issue, may be misdirecting their efforts. The act of protesting R.O.T.C. overlooks the fact that Department of Defense policy is a civilian policy. Many do not realize that while “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” is applied to the military and regulates its function, the military itself is powerless to change it. President Bill Clinton (in one of his first major policy decisions) signed the policy; he was a civilian office-holder with the civilian title of commander in chief. Congress made it law. If one does not like the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy, then one should protest against the elected policymakers, not the U.S. Army-- and especially not against well-meaning cadets at an Ivy League institution.

The website of Dartmouth’s Coalition for Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgender Concerns states that the organization has “worked on a wide variety of issues including... speaking out against the R.O.T.C. program at Dartmouth.” [Editor’s note: the CGLBTC website was updated on 17 June 2005. This clause has been altered and no longer states opposition to R.O.T.C.] For an organization purporting to be in support of diversity and progressive values, having an adversarial clause in their central exposition of the group’s mission statement seems contrary to its original ideals. But there will always be exceptions, and exceptions happen to be the norm at Dartmouth. There will be exemplary people who do not join R.O.T.C., just as there will be terrible people who do join. The problem as I see it is primarily one of perception versus reality. Yes, there are people in the military who will be close-minded, but that’s true of our entire society. Frequently, narrow-minded soldiers are the most vocal, and so their point of view is heard more often than the views of the moderate majority. Narrow-mindedness regarding homosexuality has become endemic in American society, on both sides of the aisle, from Christian fundamentalism to the glamorization of gay stereotypes as we’ve seen with the recent surge in ‘metrosexuals.’ The Army is guilty of this no more or less than the rest of the country. However, the existence of the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy serves to deter those with more moderate views from speaking out.

In actuality, most soldiers—especially officers—do not exactly ascribe to the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy. There is much discussion as to the actual implementation. On paper, it is a completely neutral policy, intended to reverse the trend of discharging gays and lesbians from the military. But in practice it is much different. Many exemplary soldiers, after leaving the service, have come out. Recently, a number of generals and admirals have done the same. Does this diminish their accomplishments in the eyes of those who served under them? Not at all. The fact that this question is even asked is evidence of an overall societal discriminatory ethic and not something that is clearly confined to the military. The Army is a terribly easy target. However, a careful reading of the issue in Soldiers magazine (the official Army magazine published by the Department of Defense) regarding real-life conflicts stemming from the implementation of the policy brings to light a different side of the story. Articles ask questions such as “What do you do if one of your best soldiers is seen at a gay bar by a less trustworthy soldier?” and “When is it your place as an officer to take an issue to a higher authority?” While some of the answers seem valuable, the overall effect of the articles is to show that the issue is less clear cut than some soldiers would like to admit.

Less controversial than “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” but just as harmful, is the second negative misconception, which is that there exists an archetypal cadet. Cadets are generally viewed as conservative warmongers who enjoy nothing more than shooting targets and waxing poetic about war. This is stereotype, not static truth. When assessing the nature of groups, a common error occurring among non-group members is simplification of perception: believing that group members uniformly share similar traits. R.O.T.C students are not inherently violent people, as the stereotype goes, but our chosen profession says that we must use violence when necessary. There is nothing in the Cadet Creed that says that we enjoy violence. Indeed, as General MacArthur once said, “On the contrary, the soldier above all other people prays for peace, for he must suffer and bear the deepest wounds and scars of war.”

From childhood, we are taught to value human life, and even the most ruthless killing machines were once part of a social structure that had already inculcated this value within their psyches. Furthermore, modern armies are much more diverse than people give them credit for, and this is also true for Dartmouth R.O.T.C. In the Army, training stresses M.O.S. (Military Occupational Specialty); nine out of ten soldiers will serve in a non-infantry role, such as in intelligence, supply, medical, and other support roles for the war-fighter. Many of the cadets do not see themselves as infantry lieutenants (there are some who do) and have joined the Army to serve in a role that supports the war-fighter. And future infantry lieutenants train to reduce collateral damage—these soldiers join to kill terrorists, if they are asked to kill in combat.

Even though it is protested against and afflicted with negative stereotypes, R.O.T.C. at Dartmouth continues. Who are R.O.T.C. cadets? We are students. We are Classics majors, Government majors, Psychology majors, Math majors, Economics majors and Undecideds. We have lives outside of the military world, eating at Food Court, griping about midterms like everyone else, and worrying about girlfriends and boyfriends like everyone else. We are ethnically diverse, yet we are all Americans. We are artists and musicians. We sing in a cappella groups and the Chamber Singers. We aspire to be artists and photographers. We are Greek, we are dry, we are everything in between. We are athletes, we are community service volunteers, but above all, we are Dartmouth students. We are like you. And we are cadets, too.