Building a Straight State: Sexuality and Social Citizenship under the 1944 G.I. Bill
Author(s): Margot Canaday
Source: The Journal of American History, Vol. 90, No. 3 (Dec., 2003), pp. 935-957
Published by: Organization of American Historians
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3660882 .
Accessed: 03/12/2013 14:21
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].
.
Organization of American Historians is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
The Journal of American History.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 74.10.198.56 on Tue, 3 Dec 2013 14:21:45 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Building
a
Straight
Social
and
G.I.
1944
Sexuality
the
under
State:
Citizenship
Bil
MargotCanaday
For more than fifty yearsnow, scholarshave celebratedthe G.I. Bill of Rights as one
of the most importantpublic policy innovationsof the post-World War II era. The
G.I. Bill is often creditedwith moving millions of working-classAmericansinto the
middle class by democratizinghigher educationand home ownershipand with ushering in the postwareconomic boom. The G.I. Bill deservescelebration-it was one
of the most far-reachingpieces of social policy legislationin the second half of the
twentieth century.Yetwhile there is no denying the scope and scale of the G.I. Bill,
the celebratoryliteraturehas not fully acknowledgedthe many exclusionsbuilt into
the program.Some historianshave noted that the design and implementationof the
legislationmade G.I. Bill benefits most accessibleto white middle-classmen. Much
less commonly remarkedupon is a 1945 VeteransAdministration(VA)ruling that
denied G.I. Bill benefits to any soldierwith an undesirabledischarge"issuedbecause
of homosexualacts or tendencies."'
Margot Canaday is a doctoral candidate at the University of Minnesota. This essay received the Louis Pelzer
MemorialAwardfor 2003.
This article was completed with financial support from the Sexuality Research Fellowship Program of the
Social Science ResearchCouncil and from the Center for the Study of SexualMinorities in the Military at the University of California, Santa Barbara.Special thanks to BarbaraWelke, who read and provided extensive comments
on numerous drafts.Many others provided suggestions and feedback at various stages of the writing process:Sara
Evans, Elaine Tyler May, Lary May, Sandy Levitsky,Greta Krippner,Kim Heikkila, Mary Strunk, Lisa Disch,
Anna Clark, Sonya Michel, Pippa Holloway, Kevin Murphy,Joanne Meyerowitz,and Alice Kessler-Harrisand the
other (anonymous) reviewersfor the JAH.
Readersmay contact Canadayat <[email protected]>.
1 The
celebratoryliteratureon the G.I. Bill includes Michael J. Bennett, WhenDreams Came True:The G.I.
Bill and theMaking ofModernAmerica(Washington, 1996); SuzanneMettler,"Bringingthe State Back In to Civic
Engagement:Policy FeedbackEffects of the G.I. Bill for World War II Veterans,"AmericanPoliticalScienceReview,
96 (June 2002), 351-65; Theda Skocpol, "Deliveringfor Young Families:The Resonanceof the G.I. Bill,"American Prospect,7 (Sept.-Oct. 1996), 66-72; and "The 1944 GI Bill of Rights: Redefining Citizenship for Veterans,"
papers delivered at the annual meeting of the Organization of American Historians, Washington, D.C., April
2002 (in Margot Canaday'spossession). Historical accounts that highlight the program'sgender or racial exclusions include Susan M. Hartmann, The Home Front and Beyond:American Womenin the 1940s (Boston, 1982);
Nancy E Cott, Public Vows:A HistoryofMarriageand the Nation (Cambridge,Mass., 2000); and David H. Onkst,
"'Firsta Negro ... Incidentallya Veteran':BlackWorld War Two Veteransand the G.I. Bill of Rights in the Deep
South, 1944-1948," Journal of Social History,31 (Spring 1998), 517-44. For a compelling account of exclusions
from G.I. Bill benefits based on race, class, and gender that pays only passing attention to sexuality,see Lizabeth
Cohen, A Consumers'Republic: The Politics of Mass Consumptionin PostwarAmerica (New York, 2003). For
excerptsfrom the 1945 VeteransAdministration (vA)ruling, see Donald Webster Cory, TheHomosexualin Amer-
The Journal of American History
December 2003
This content downloaded from 74.10.198.56 on Tue, 3 Dec 2013 14:21:45 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
935
936
TheJournal
ofAmerican
History
December
2003
The G.I. Bill deservesconsideration
by historiansbecauseit was the firstfederal
lesbiansfromthe economicbenefitsof the
that
excluded
and
explicitly
policy
gays
welfarestate.Feministhistorianshavealreadyobservedthat embeddedin the G.I.
norm that posiBill, as in otherwelfarestatesocialprovision,was a heterosexual
tionedmaleheadsof householdsas the mostdeservingcitizens.2Butfeministhistorians have uncoveredthe heterosexualbias of the G.I. Bill (and welfarestate
programsmoregenerally)by analyzinghow statebenefitswerefilteredthroughmarriage.3Those historianshavefocused,in otherwords,on one-halfof an imagined
while leavingthe otherhalf (homosexuality)
binary(heterosexuality)
mostlyin the
shadows.This essay,by contrast,examinesthe G.I. Bill fromthe vantagepoint of
those who were excludedfrom its benefitsbecauseof homosexuality.
This focus
makesclearthat soldiersdischargedfor homosexuality
werenot just inadvertently
excludedfromthe economicbenefitsof the G.I. Billbecausetheydid not fit into the
normativeheterosexual
familymodelthroughwhichbenefitswereprimarilychanneled.Rather,homosexualexclusionwas explicit,built into the veryfoundationof
thewelfarestate.
My concernis not onlywith the developmentof the vApolicyon homosexuality
and its impacton the men and womenwho weresubjectto it, but with what the
Particpolicyrevealsaboutthe developmentof Americancitizenshipmoregenerally.
ularlyrelevantto my examinationof the G.I. Bill is the classic1950 workby the
BritishsociologistT. H. Marshall,"Citizenshipand SocialClass."Writtenduring
the immediatepostwarperiodthatmy articlechronicles,Marshall's
essayremainsat
the centerof contemporary
discussionsof citizenshipandthe welfarestate.Numerous historianshavebeen influencedby Marshall's
the
conceptof socialcitizenship,
ideathatall citizenshavea rightto a "modicumof economicwelfareand security."
Marshallarguedthat citizenshipprogressedhistoricallythroughthreeoverlapping
stages.Civilcitizenship,involvingthe rightto property,liberty,justice,anddueprocess of law,occurredin the eighteenthcentury.Politicalcitizenship,involvingthe
rightto vote and to participatein the politicalprocess,was a nineteenth-century
development.Citizenshipwould becometrulydemocraticonly when the stageof
socialcitizenshipwasattained,whencitizens'basiceconomicneedsweremetso that
they could participateto the fullestextentin the socialand politicallife of their
ica:A SubjectiveApproach(New York, 1951), 278-79. After Cory'swork, the first discussion of homosexual exclusion from the G.I. Bill appearedin Allan B&rub6,ComingOut underFire: The Historyof GayMen and Womenin
WorldWarII (New York, 1990). This essay builds on that pathbreakingresearchby situating it in relation to the
feminist literatureon citizenship and the welfarestate and furtherexploring the legislativehistory of the G.I. Bill,
the development of VApolicy on homosexuality,and the postwarevolution of military dischargepolicy.
2 See, for
example, Cott, Public Vows;Cohen, Consumers'
Republic;Hartmann, Home Front and Beyond;and
Gretchen Ritter, "Of War and Virtue: Gender, American Citizenship, and Veterans'Benefits afterWorld War II,"
in ComparativeStudyof Conscriptionin the ArmedForces,ed. LarsMjoset and Stephen Van Holde (Amsterdam,
2002), 201-26.
3 This statement most closely describesCott, Public Vows;but see also Hartmann, HomeFrontand Beyond;and
Cohen, Consumers'
Republic.Other feminist works also clarify the relationshipbetween welfare state benefits and
marriage;see Linda Gordon, Pitied but Not Entitled:SingleMothersand the Historyof Welfare,1890-1935 (Cambridge, Mass., 1994); and Alice Kessler-Harris,In PursuitofEquity: Women,Men, and the QuestforEconomicCitiAmerica (New York, 2001). On women's access to veterans' preferencepoints, a
zenship in Twentieth-Century
relatedand important advantagethough not a welfarestate benefit, see Linda K. Kerber,No ConstitutionalRightto
Be Ladies:Womenand the Obligationsof Citizenship(New York, 1998), esp. 221-302.
This content downloaded from 74.10.198.56 on Tue, 3 Dec 2013 14:21:45 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
andSocialCitizenship
undertheG.I.Bill
Sexuality
937
nation.4Writingin the mid-twentiethcentury,Marshallsawin the postwarBritish
welfarestatethe socialprogramsthatwouldinaugurate
the socialcitizenshipstage.5
The Americanwelfarestatewas more miserlythan its Britishcounterpart,but
manypolicymakershopedthatthe G.I. Billwouldserveas an openingwedgethat
wouldleadto a universalsystemof entitlementsforall citizens.The G.I. Bill,which
and disability
complementedpreexistingveterans'benefitssuch as hospitalization
The
a
welfare
state
for
veterans.
landmark
created
self-contained
eligible
pensions,
an
legislationprovidedsupportforveteranspursuingeducationandtraining; unemloansforthe purchaseof a home,farm,or smallbusiness;anda
ploymentallowance;
15 percentof the
veterans'employmentservice.By 1948, the G.I. Bill represented
of
federalbudget.Veteransconstitutednearlyhalfthe studentbody collegesanduniversitiesacrossthe country.Some2 millionveteranstook out loansunderthe prothe
gram.Veterans'benefits-which alongwith SocialSecurityoutlaysrepresented
Marshall
of
social
that
the
kind
provision
largestportionof the welfarestate-were
believedhadthe potentialto democratize
citizenship.6
to restrictveterans'benefits
But closeattentionto the VA's
use of homosexuality
Bill
not
democratize
the
G.I.
did
that
demonstrates
citizenship.Rather,the
simply
G.I. Billresultedin a simultaneous
expansionandcontractionin citizenship-openAmerihome
and
education
ownershipfor manyworking-and middle-class
ing up
fromtaking
for homosexuality
canswhileit explicitlypreventedsoldiersdischarged
of thosesamebenefits.Evenas citizenshipwassupposedlybecomingmore
advantage
democratic,then,the statusof citizendid not confera sharedset of benefits.Rather,
first-andsecond-class
benefitswereselectivelydistributedto differentiate
citizens,a
that not only set soldiersaboveciviliansbut, as the vA policymakes
differentiation
suchassexualidentityto sepcharacteristics
reliedon ascriptive
clear,simultaneously
aratethe deservingfromthe undeserving.
ST. H. Marshall, "Citizenship and Social Class," in The CitizenshipDebates:A Reader,ed. Gershon Shafir
(Minneapolis, 1998), 93-111, esp. 94. Marshall'sessayis "thefounding document" of modern citizenship studies,
accordingto Engin E Isin and PatriciaK. Wood, Citizenshipand Identity(London, 1999), 25. See also J. M. Barbalet, Citizenship:Rights,Struggle,and ClassInequality(Minneapolis, 1988). For an important critique, see Nancy
Fraserand Linda Gordon,"Civil Citizenship against Social Citizenship? On the Ideology of Contract-VersusCharity,"in The Conditionof Citizenship,ed. Bart van Steenbergen(London, 1994), 90-107. For other feminist
discussions of Marshall and social citizenship, see Nancy E Cott, "Marriageand Women's Citizenship in the
United States, 1830-1934," American Historical Review, 103 (Dec. 1998), 1440-74; Linda K. Kerber, "The
Meanings of Citizenship,"JournalofAmericanHistory,84 (Dec. 1997), 833-54; and Kessler-Harris,In Pursuitof
Equity.
5 Some queer theoristshave proposed a fourth stage, seeing "sexualliberation ... [as] an important component
of a civilized and democraticsociety"and advocating"'sexualrights'as an important extension of Marshall'smodel
of the three stages of citizenship."This useful development in the theorizationof sexuality and citizenship should
not elide questions about how Marshall'sthree stages of citizenship have also been organized by ideas about normative sexuality.See Eileen H. Richardsonand BryanS. Turner,"Sexual,Intimate, or ReproductiveCitizenship?,"
CitizenshipStudies,5 (Nov. 2001), 329-38, esp. 330.
6 Edwin Amenta, Bold
Relief-InstitutionalPoliticsand the Originsof Modern Social Policy (Princeton, 1998),
esp. 191-230; Edwin Amenta and Theda Skocpol, "Redefiningthe New Deal: World War II and the Development of Social Provision in the United States,"in The Politicsof Social Policy in the United States,ed. Margaret
Weir, Ann Shola Orloff, and Theda Skocpol (Princeton, 1988), 94, 104; Samantha Sparks,"The G.I. Bill: The
Rites of Its Passage"(M.A. thesis, Duke University,2001), 20-24, 96; KathleenJill Frydl, "The G.I. Bill" (Ph.D.
diss., Universityof Chicago, 2000), 201. "Studyafter study,"LizabethCohen writes, "hasdocumented that World
War II veterans achieved substantiallyhigher median incomes, educational attainments, home ownership rates,
138.
and net worths than non-veteransof comparableage."Cohen, Consumers'Republic,
This content downloaded from 74.10.198.56 on Tue, 3 Dec 2013 14:21:45 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
938
TheJournalof AmericanHistory
December2003
The VA'spolicy on homosexualexclusionwas extremelysignificant,even though it
was only partlysuccessfulin keeping benefitsout of the hands of gay and lesbiansoldiers.While approximatelynine thousandWorldWarII-era soldiersand sailorswere
denied G.I. Bill benefitsbecausethey were undesirablydischargedfor homosexuality,
it is very likely that an even greaternumber of soldierswho experiencedand even
acted upon homosexual desire went undetected and were thus able to use the G.I.
Bill.7 But the claims of such soldiers were renderedinsecure by the VAregulation,
which explicitlywrote homosexualexclusioninto federalwelfarestate policy for the
first time. And that insecurity-made visible by the numeroussoldierswho actually
were denied benefits by the VApolicy because of homosexual offenses-reinforced
heterosexualityas normativefor the entire citizenry.
Veteranshad receivedsome assistanceafter previouswars, but the scope of G.I. Bill
support was unprecedented.The G.I. Bill was a cornerstoneof postwar planning,
and the generosityof the programwas based,in part, on gratitudeto returningveterans who had sufferedseveredisruptionand hardshipduringthe war.It was also based
on a broaderculturalfearof the possibilityof anotherdepressionand the social instability that 16 million unemployed veterans might provoke, of "a military group
returningto find their servicesno longer needed, [of] a workingclasswithout jobs,"
as the veteran Charles G. Bolte put it in 1945. "Those veterans have learned to
fight,"warnedthe AmericanLegion, the leadingveterans'organization,in its promotion of the G.I. Bill; "theyare not going to be stopped."Legislatorsrememberedthe
World WarI veteranswho had formed a "bonusarmy"and marchedon Washington
to demand their bonuses;they worriedthat a new generationof WorldWar II veterans would wander the country aimlesslyif not directed in some way. The country
would have "alot of trouble,"Sen. Harley Kilgorewarned,if soldierswere not given
"acooling off period"afterthe war "in which they arelearningsomething useful."8
7 For an estimate that between 1941 and 1945, more than 4,000 sailorsand 5,000 soldierswere so discharged,
see Berube, ComingOut underFire, 147. On the greaternumber who might have been consideredeligible for such
dischargesbut were not, see ibid., 245. According to Alfred C. Kinsey'smidcentury reports, roughly 4% of adult
men and 2% of adult women were exclusivelyhomosexual. By those estimates, perhapshalf a million or more of
the 16 million men and women who served during World War II would have been exclusively homosexual-a
number that dwarfs the 9,000 undesirably discharged for homosexuality. See Alfred C. Kinsey, Wardell B.
Pomeroy, and Clyde E. Martin, Sexual Behaviorin the Human Male (1948; Bloomington, 1998), 610-66, esp.
651; Alfred C. Kinsey et al., Sexual Behavior in the Human Female (Philadelphia, 1953), 446-501, and John
D'Emilio, SexualPolitics,Sexual Communities:TheMaking of a HomosexualMinority in the United States, 19401970 (Chicago, 1983), 35. I avoid the shorthand "homosexualveteran"or "homosexualsoldier"to refer to persons undesirablydischargedfrom the military for homosexuality because homosexualitywas not a fully consolidated identity category then-some persons defined as homosexual by military policy understood themselves in
those terms in those years;some would come to view themselvesthat way later;some would never describethemselves as "homosexual."
Veteransfrom the RevolutionaryWar, the Civil War Union forces, the Spanish-AmericanWar, and World
8
War I received compensation from the federal government-typically land grants, cash bonuses, or pensions.
Sparks,"G.I. Bill,"57. See also Theda Skocpol, ProtectingSoldiersand Mothers:ThePoliticalOriginsofSocial Policy
in the UnitedStates(Cambridge,Mass., 1992). "This bill is undoubtedly more extensive and generous in its benefits to returningveteransthan any bill previouslyintroduced as to this or any other war,"stated a Senate committee. "We believe that this is entirely justifiable in view of the characterof service in this war."U.S. Congress,
Senate, Committee on Finance,ProvidingFederalGovernmentAidfor the Readjustmentin CivilianLife of Returning
This content downloaded from 74.10.198.56 on Tue, 3 Dec 2013 14:21:45 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
SexualityandSocialCitizenshipunderthe G.I. Bill
939
Support for the G.I. Bill gained momentum as it moved through Congress,
despite the initial opposition of some New Dealers(includingFranklinD. Roosevelt)
to the exclusionof civiliansfrom the extensivebenefits of the bill. The New Dealers
believed, accordingto the social scientistsEdwin Amenta and Theda Skocpol, "that
the needs of ex-soldiersshould be met chieflythroughprogramsdirectedat the entire
population."Indeed, Roosevelthad bravelygone to an AmericanLegion convention
to tell veteransthat "noperson, becausehe wore a uniform must thereafterbe placed
in a special class of beneficiariesover and above all other citizens."Such sentiments
led Rooseveltto prefera competing version of the G.I. Bill that distributedbenefits
to civiliansas well as veterans.9
The VeteransAdministration,under the leadershipof an anti-New Deal Republican, FrankHines, was committed to a differentset of principles:First,the VAshould
be designatedas the agency to provideall servicesto returningveterans,and second,
civiliansshould in no way be broughtinto programsfor returningveterans."Whenever the opportunityaroseto win benefitsfor veteransthat would be denied to other
citizens,"Amentawrites, "theVAjumped at it." Closely alliedwith the VA,the American Legion drafted the numerous proposalsfor programsfor veteransinto a single
omnibus bill. The resultinglegislation expressedthe commitment of the American
Legion and the VAto the idea that civilians not join veteransin collecting benefits.
Indeed, the historian KathleenJill Frydl notes that the AmericanLegion continued
to fight againstcivilian benefits long afterthe G.I. Bill was enacted;it opposed not
only the "interminglingof civilians and veterans"but also "the granting of any
greaterbenefitsto civiliansthan those grantedto veterans."10
With an increasinglyconservativeCongress committed to abolishing New Deal
reformsand with growingpopularsupportfor a veterans'bill, the VA'svision of postwar reformtriumphedover Roosevelt's.Conservativessupportedthe bill, in the historianAlan Brinkley'swords, "preciselybecausethe programwas limited to veterans,"
directingbenefitsto an especiallydeservingsegment of the citizenry.New Deal liberals initially opposed the legislation but eventuallysigned onto the programin the
hopes that, accordingto Brinkley,the G.I. Bill would become the basisof a "broader
network of programsaimed at the whole population."Even Roosevelt changed his
position on benefitsfor veterans,statingthat soldiershad "beencompelledto make a
greater... sacrificethan the rest of us.""
WorldWarII Veterans,78 Cong., 2 sess., March 18, 1944, p. 2. Charles G. Bolte, The New Veteran(New York,
1945), 49. During World War II 16 million men and women served in the military. See Gary Nash et al., The
AmericanPeople:Creatinga Nation and a Society(2 vols., New York, 1994), II, 874. For the American Legion
statement, see Frydl, "G.I. Bill," 147. U.S. Congress, Senate, Committee on MilitaryAffairs,Hearingson S. 1730
and S. 1893, 78 Cong., 2 sess., June 14, 1944, p. 343.
9 Amenta and Skocpol, "Redefiningthe New Deal," 85; Frydl, "G.I. Bill,"47, 23.
10Amenta, Bold Relief,247; Frydl, "G.I. Bill," 75, esp. 150 and 402. The vA, created in 1930, absorbed the
post-Civil War Bureauof Pensions and small veterans'bureausestablishedafter other wars. Initially a low-profile
agency, afterWorld War II, the KoreanWar,and the Vietnam War,the vAhad an annual budget exceeding that of
any other federal agency except the Department of Defense. George T. Kurian, ed., Historical Guide to the U.S.
Government(New York, 1998), 608-13.
11Brian Waddell, The Waragainstthe New Deal: WorldWarII and AmericanDemocracy(Dekalb, 2001), 132;
Alan Brinkley, TheEnd ofReform:New Deal Liberalismin Recessionand War(New York, 1995), 259. See Amenta,
Bold Relief,247.
This content downloaded from 74.10.198.56 on Tue, 3 Dec 2013 14:21:45 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
940
TheJournalof AmericanHistory
December2003
The version of the bill that Congresspassed was generous in that it offered full
benefits to all who had served a minimum of ninety days and receiveda discharge
"underconditions other than dishonorable."The implicit rationalebehind the eligibility policy was that while militaryservicewas an obligationof citizenship,such service deservedto be rewardedwhen faithfullyrendered."Basically,everycitizen has a
duty to servein the armedforces,"noted a navy report(which conflated"citizen"and
"man"),but the G.I. Bill was "passedby a gratefulCongressfor the benefit of persons
who served. .. duringWorldWarII."Fromthe outset it was clearthat dishonorably
dischargedsoldiers, regardlessof the length of their service,had not earned entitlement to G.I. Bill benefits, whereassoldierswho were separatedwith honorabledischargesaftereven briefservicehad.12
Yet all branchesof the serviceawardeda series of dischargesthat rangedbetween
honorable and dishonorable. The commonest of the in-between dischargeswas
or "blue,"dischargebecause the document was printed on
called an "undesirable,"
blue paper.The blue dischargewas an administrativedischargeimposed aftera hearing. Those who gave evidence of "undesirablehabits or traits of character"were
requiredto appearbeforea boardof threeofficers.The boardcould not hand down a
prison sentence,but neitherdid it follow court-martialprocedure-it was not bound
by rules of evidence, and those appearingbeforeit were not entitled to counsel. The
dischargehad been in existence since World War I. But it came into much greater
usage during World War II, when it was often used for the quick removalfrom the
serviceof a soldierwhose offensesdid not merit a court-martialor in caseswhen the
servicedid not choose to devote the resourcesor providethe proceduralprotections
involved in a court-martial.13
The proposedlegislationmade all soldierswho were discharged"underconditions
other than dishonorable"eligible for the G.I. Bill in orderto protect undesirablydischarged soldiers. Army and navy representativesobjected to this terminology and
urged Congressto limit the extension of benefits to soldiersdischarged"underhonorable conditions."Without that limitation, AdmiralJacobs of the navy warned a
senator,"benefitswill be extended to those persons who will have been given ...
undesirabledischarges[and] might have a detrimentaleffect on morale."But members of Congressargued that the legislationshould distributebenefits broadly.Presented with the objections of the military to the more generous terminology,
CongresswomanEdith Nourse Rogerscommented, "I would rathertake the chance
so that all deservingmen get their benefits."During hearingson the G.I. Bill, Chairman John Rankin of the House Committee on World War Veteran'sLegislation
declared,"I am for the most liberalterms."Whetherbenefitswould be distributedto
12 Servicemen'sReadjustmentAct of 1944 (G.I. Bill of
Rights), Pub. L. No. 78-346, 58 Stat. 284; Commander-in-ChiefAtlantic and U.S. Atlantic Fleet to Secretaryof Defense, June 1946, file 292, box 800, Decimal
File G-1 Personnel, Records of the War Department General and Special Staffs, 1860-1952, RG 165 (National
Archives, College Park,Md.).
13U.S. Congress, House, Committee on MilitaryAffairs,Blue Discharges,79 Cong., 2 sess.,Jan. 30, 1946, pp.
3-4. World War I records show 24,260 dischargesissued that lay in between honorable and dishonorable discharges. See file 211, box 37, AGo Legislativeand Policy Precedent Files, 1943-1975, Records of the Adjutant
General'sOffice, RG407 (National Archives, College Park,Md.). B&rube,ComingOut underFire, 129-48.
This content downloaded from 74.10.198.56 on Tue, 3 Dec 2013 14:21:45 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
SexualityandSocialCitizenshipunderthe G.I. Bill
941
soldiers discharged"underhonorable conditions"or under conditions "otherthan
dishonorable"was a majorpoint of controversyduringSenatedebateon the Bill. The
Senate reporton proposedG.I. Bill legislationconcluded:
from
Manypersonswhohaveservedfaithfullyandevenwithdistinctionarereleased
. . . It is
theserviceforrelatively
minoroffenses,receivinga so-calledbluedischarge.
theopinionof thecommitteethatsuchoffensesshouldnot barentitlementto benefits otherwisebestowedunlessthe offensewas such as, for example[the act of a
conditions.
deserteror of a conscientious
objector]... to constitutedishonorable
Accordingly,when Congress finally enacted the veterans'legislation, it authorized
benefits to all who had been discharged"underconditions other than dishonorable."
The militaryitself interpretedthe new legislationas grantingbenefitsto soldierswith
undesirabledischarges:"The recentlyenacted 'G.I.' legislation,"explainedthe army's
adjutantgeneral, "containsprovisionsunder which it appearsthat [those with blue
discharges]are eligiblefor... benefits."'4
But the VAwould exploit the ambiguityof the eligibilityrequirementsin administering the new law. In the text of the G.I. Bill, Congresshad specified only that those
who were conscientiousobjectors,had deserted,or had refusedto wear the uniform
should be barred"underany laws administeredby the VeteransAdministration."But
ratherthan viewing that list as a complete enumerationof the offenses that would
justify a dischargeunder dishonorableconditions, the VAvastly expanded its own
powers by declaringthat it would make that determinationon a case-by-casebasis.
"The matterof definition is left to ... the Veterans'Administration,"declaredone VA
official.The VAthen mandatedthat, althoughdistinct from a dishonorabledischarge
(which required a court-martialconviction), an undesirabledischarge could take
place underhonorableor dishonorableconditions.A soldier with an undesirabledischargecould receivebenefits only if the VAdeterminedthat he had been discharged
under "honorableconditions."'5
Many soldiersaccusedof homosexualityduringWorld War II were caught in this
limbo between an honorable and a dishonorabledischarge.As a result of a determined effort by militarypsychiatriststo reduce the blanket use of the court-martial
for homosexualoffenses, in early 1943 the militarybegan systematicallyto issue the
The new policy relied on a
blue dischargeto soldierssuspected of homosexuality.16
Politicsin the
14 Congressional
Record,78 Cong., 2 sess., March 24, 1944, p. 3077; Roland Young, Congressional
SecondWorldWar(New York, 1956), 214; Congressional
Record,78 Cong., 2 sess., June 13, 1944, p. 5890; U.S.
Congress, House, Committee on World WarVeterans'Legislation,Hearingson H.R. 3917 and S. 1767, 78 Cong.,
1 sess., March 30, 1944, p. 419; Committee on Finance, ProvidingFederalGovernmentAidfor the Readjustmentin
Civilian Life ofReturningWorldWarII Veterans,15; Adjutant Generalto James Burke, District Attorney,Sept. 28,
1944, file 211, box 36, AGOLegislativeand Policy PrecedentFiles, Recordsof the Adjutant General'sOffice.
'5 The law is quoted in Committee on Military Affairs,Blue Discharges,8. Ibid., 9; Luther Ellis to Mr. Hiller,
Oct. 30, 1944, Policy Series 800.04, Recordsof the Department of VeteransAffairs, 1773-1976, RG15 (National
Archives, Washington, D.C.); Frank T. Hines,"LegalBars Under Section 300, Public No. 346, 78 Cong., and
Characterof Discharge Under Public No. 2, 73 Cong., As Amended, and Public No. 346, 78 Cong.," Oct. 30,
1944, vol. 2, ibid.; Committee on MilitaryAffairs,Blue Discharges,9.
16The new discharge policy complemented "a tightening of anti-homosexual screening standards"during
This content downloaded from 74.10.198.56 on Tue, 3 Dec 2013 14:21:45 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
942
TheJournalof AmericanHistory
December2003
three-parttypology for understandinghomosexuality.At the one end of the spectrum
was the violent offenderwho committed sodomy by force and was subject to courtmartial.At the other end of the spectrum,to be treatedand returnedto duty,was the
"casual"homosexualwho had engagedin homosexualitydue to curiosityor intoxication. Finally-in between these two extremes-the "true pervert"was to be dischargedundesirably.The policy shift, which emphasizeddischargeover court-martial
(and imprisonment),finallyearnedthe supportof militaryhard-linersbecauseit preservedprison as an option for the most egregiousoffenseswhile providingthe military with an extremely efficient way to remove those with "undesirablehabits or
traits"from the service.Ironically,while militarypsychiatristsadvocatedthe blue dischargefor homosexualitybecauseit was more humane than imprisonment,the new
dischargepolicy vastly expandedthe military'sregulatoryand surveillanceapparatus
and made it much easierto removesoldierssuspectedof homosexualacts or tendencies. In short, the militarywas able to use the blue dischargeto removesoldiersfor
homosexualitywith far less evidencethan would be necessaryfor court-martial.17
In addition to undesirabledischargesgiven to drug addicts, bed wetters, alcoholics, and AfricanAmerican soldiers who challenged racism in their units, the army
issued around 5,000 undesirabledischargesfor homosexualityduringWorld War II.
Some 4,000 sailors were undesirablydischargedfor homosexualityfrom the navy
during the same period. The dischargecarrieda heavy stigma. The Henry Foundation, a New York organizationthat assisted homosexuals in trouble with the law,
stated that the undesirabledischarge,"followinga man through the years,"was "too
great a punishment."The organizationreportedthat it had "beenconsulted on severaloccasionsby citizensand [veterans'organizations]in their effortsto lighten what
in many cases has been an intolerablyunjust burden."CongressmanJohn Rankin
declaredthat he would rathercome home with a dishonorable
dischargethan as "neither fish nor fowl,"with an undesirabledischargethat "I would have to explain for
the restof my life."'
induction.In 1942 screeningregulations
"forthe firsttimedefinedboththe homosexualandthe normalperson
for rejectinggay draftees,"
and the adjutantgeneralorderedWomen'sArmyCorps
... and clarifiedprocedures
recruiters
to consider"undesirable
habitsandtraits,"includinghomosexual
tendencies,amongfemaleappli(WAC)
cants.See Berube,ComingOutunderFire,chap.1, esp. 19, 30. SeeLeisaD. Meyer,Creating
G.I.Jane:Sexuality
andPowerin the Women's
to
ArmyCorpsduringWorldWarII (NewYork,1996). On the struggleof psychiatrists
reformthe military's
discharge
policy,seeB&rube,
ComingOutunderFire,129-48.
with an arrayof categories
17The policywasclearerin the abstractthanin practice.It presentedcommanders
and no simpleway to distinguishbetween"trueperverts"
who had committedhomosexualacts and "latent"
homosexuals
who hadnot engagedin homosexualactswhilein theservicebuthadperhapsconfessedhomosexual
desiresto a militarypsychiatrist,
doctor,or chaplain."Wherepreviously
only thosemenwho hadbeencaughtin
the sexualact andconvictedin courtwerepunished,now merelybeinghomosexualor havingsuch'tendencies'
couldentrapbothmenandwomen,labelthemassick,andremovethemfromtheservicewithan undesirable
diswrites.SeeB&rube,
charge,"
ComingOutunderFire,146-47.
B&rube
SeeComdischarges.
18BetweenDecember7, 1941, andJune30, 1945, the armyissued51,963 undesirable
mitteeon MilitaryAffairs,BlueDischarges,
3; andB&rube,
ComingOutunderFire,232. GeorgeHenry,"Reportof
the Psychiatrist-in-Chief,"
April 15, 1949, pp. 8-9, box 62, Societyfor the Preventionof CrimePapers(Rare
Booksand Manuscripts
ColumbiaUniversity,New York,N.Y.);U.S. Congress,House,Committeeon
Library,
WorldWarVeterans'
Legislation,
Hearingson H.R.3749 andRelatedBills,79 Cong., 1 sess.,June20, 1945, p.
seemsto be the subtextof the phrase"neitherfishnorfowl,"probablysignifyingthe liminal
159. Homosexuality
stateof thehomosexualas authentically
neithermalenorfemale.
This content downloaded from 74.10.198.56 on Tue, 3 Dec 2013 14:21:45 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
SexualityandSocialCitizenshipunderthe G.I. Bill
943
While the vA had assumed responsibilityfor deciding which undesirableswould
be eligible for benefits, agency officialswere initially confused about how to adjudicate individual cases. "This office is having considerabledifficulty in defining the
term 'underconditions other than dishonorable,"'the vAadministrator,FrankHines,
wrote to Secretaryof the Navy JamesForrestalin 1944. As a result,the vA began to
constructmore explicit guidelinesfor adjudicatingbenefits. In October of that year,
the vA used languagefrom the World War Veterans'Act of 1924 to argue that any
dischargefor an offense involving "moralturpitude"would constitute a discharge
under dishonorableconditions. But in enacting this policy, the VAignored statutory
guidelinesfrom the 1924 law that had requiredthat a soldierbe convictedby a civil or
militarycourt beforebeing disqualifiedfrom benefits.A memo fromvA headquarters
expressedfrustrationthat local VAoffices were following the languageof the 1924
legislationmore literallyand were awardingbenefits to veteranswith blue discharges
as long as they had not been convicted under civil or militarylaw. One adjudicator,
facing numerous cases of soldiers given undesirabledischargesfor homosexuality,
wrote in to askwhether"in the absenceof any . .. convictionsby court martial"such
dischargeswere to be consideredas underdishonorableconditions.19
As the letter indicates,the VA'spolicy on eligibilityfor undesirablesconfusedsome
adjudicators-why wouldn'ta dischargethat was not dishonorablefall into the cateThe muddled languageof the statgory "underconditions other than dishonorable"?
ute was compounded by the situation of service members discharged for
homosexuality,only some of whom were chargedwith committing homosexualacts,
and many of whom had stellarservicerecords.To some VAadjudicators,such soldiers
must have seemed the sort Congresshad in mind when it added to the G.I. Bill the
"liberalizingprovision"that those whose servicehad been "meritorious,honest, and
faithful"were not to be deprivedof benefits.20
In April 1945 AdministratorHines responded to such confusion by issuing an
order that addressedhomosexualityexplicitly.The policy held that an undesirable
dischargebecauseof homosexualacts or tendencies "generallywill be consideredas
under dishonorableconditions and a bar to entitlement."But that orderdid not end
debate on the issue. A 1946 letter from the AmericanCivil LibertiesUnion (ACLU)
assertedthat because a blue dischargewas
challenged the new VApolicy. The ACLU
not a dishonorabledischarge,it was awardedunder conditions other than dishonor19 Frank T. Hines to Secretaryof the Navy James Forrestal,Aug. 9, 1944, Policy Series 807, Records of the
Department of VeteransAffairs;Hines,"LegalBarsUnder Section 300, Public No. 346, 78 Cong., and Character
of Discharge Under Public No. 2, 73 Cong., As Amended, and Public No. 346, 78 Cong."; Solicitor to Boardof
Veterans'Appeals, memo, Sept. 28, 1945, Policy Series 300.5, Records of the Department of VeteransAffairs;
World War VeteransAct of 1924, Pub. L. No. 68-242, 43 Stat. 607; Adjudication Officer W. E Greene to Director, Veterans'Claims Service,April 21, 1945, vol. 2, Policy Series 800.04, Recordsof the Department of Veterans
Affairs.
20 Homosexuals "mayeven turn out to be excellent soldiers,"according to "Soldiersand Sex,"Newsweek,July
26, 1943, pp. 70, 72. "Section 1503 ... requiresa dischargeor releasefrom active service under honorable conditions as a prerequisiteto entitlement to benefits . .. but adds a liberalizingprovision, to the effect that, except as to
persons dishonorablydischarged,benefits to which a person otherwisewould be entitled but for a dischargeunder
other than honorable conditions may be awardedif his service is shown to be otherwise meritorious,honest, and
faithful."Committee on Finance,ProvidingFederalGovernmentAidfor the Readjustmentin Civilian Life ofReturning WorldWarII Veterans,16.
This content downloaded from 74.10.198.56 on Tue, 3 Dec 2013 14:21:45 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
944
TheJournal
ofAmerican
History
December
2003
ableandthe denialof benefitswasillegal.The VA'sresponseto this letterwassimply
to reassertthe textof the new policyon homosexuality.
Likewise,whenlocaloffices
the eligibilityof veteransdischarged
continuedto requestassistancein adjudicating
for homosexuality,
dismissedtheirquerieswith pronouncements
that
headquarters
and sufficientlyclear"and discouragedthem
the policywas "fullycomprehensive
fromsubmittingclaimsto Washington"unlessunusualfactsarepresent."21
While the militaryawardedthe undesirabledischargefor a varietyof traitsor
behaviorsthat rendereda soldierunsuitable,a dischargefor homosexuality
was the
of
undesirable
that
led
to
a
from
VA.
In his
the
only type
discharge
separatepolicy
in
account
of
homosexual
life
America,Donald Webster
mid-twentieth-century
for homoCoryobservedthatthe VApolicydenyingbenefitsto soldiersdischarged
of
was
"one
the
last
orders
of
an
administrator."
Some
sexuality
outgoing
explanation
forthe policymayindeedrestin Hines'sbiography.
Hineswasappointedto headthe
VeteransBureauby PresidentWarrenG. Hardingin 1923 andthen reappointed
by
presidentsCalvinCoolidgeand HerbertHoover.Duringthe GreatDepression,he
of the bonuspaymentto WorldWarI veterans,
foughtto blockearlydisbursement
that
the
had
with its veterans."
insisting
government already"dealtmost generously
In 1930, the VeteransBureaubecamethe VeteransAdministration,
and Hineswas
its
first
administrator.
He
ran
the
with a [budappointed
agencytightly,"emerging
get]surpluseveryyear."Evenafterthe passageof the G.I. Bill,observedtheNew York
therewereno complaintsof extravaTimes,"underGeneralHines'sadministration,
gance."22
Hines, a conservativeRepublican,sharedwith other New Deal opponentsthe
belief that too much social provisioncould harm the recipients."He has often
expressedfearthat the moralfiberof the Americanpeopleis in dangerof being
underminedthroughworkreliefandsecurityprograms,"
a 1944 biographical
sketch
of
VA
the
administrator.
"He
has
...
the
that
one
hundred
reported
expressed opinion
dollarsa monthfroma Governmentreliefor SocialSecurityprogramwouldinduce
Hines'sphilosophy
manycitizensto give up all effortto get privateemployment."
wassharedby othersconcernedaboutthewaythe G.I. Billwasimplemented,
particularlythe "52-20Club,"whichprovidedunemployedveteranstwentydollarsa week
for up to fifty-twoweeks."Benefitsshouldnot encouragelaziness,"
warneda navy
on
the
G.I.
Bill.
For
unmarried
servicemen
without
report
"many
responsibilities
[the52-20 Club]offereda oneyearvacationwithpay."Implicitin suchwarningswas
the idea that besidessoldiering,the male citizen'skey obligationwas to work. If
overly generous benefits freed men of that obligation, such benefits would create
weak and dependent men. Hines's overallfrugalitymay have resulted in a specific
policy barringhomosexual soldiers from benefits because of these broadercultural
21
Committee on Military Affairs, Blue Discharges,8-9; Clifford Forster,American Civil LibertiesUnion, to
Omar Bradley,VeteransAdministration,Jan. 18, 1946, Policy Series 800, Recordsof the Department of Veterans
Affairs;O. W. Clark,VeteransAdministration,to Forster,Feb. 2, 1946, ibid.; George E. Brown, Director of Veterans Claims Service,to Manager,"InstructionsNumbers 1, 2, and 3, Sections 300 and 1503, Public No. 346, 78th
Congress,"memo, May 11, 1945, vol. 2, Policy Series800.04, ibid.
22
Cory, Homosexualin America,278-79; CurrentBiography1944 (New York, 1945), 296-99; New YorkTimes,
April 5, 1960, p. 37.
This content downloaded from 74.10.198.56 on Tue, 3 Dec 2013 14:21:45 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
SexualityandSocialCitizenshipunderthe G.I. Bill
945
associationslinking immorality,male effeminacy,and economic dependency.Moreover,in drawingon the associationbetween generousentitlementand moral decline,
the VA'santihomosexualpolicy justifiedthe agency'sdismissalof congressionalintentions to distributebenefits broadly,a dismissalthat some undesirablydischargedsoldierswould soon challenge.23
The VA'spolicy on blue dischargesdid not make sense to some undesirablydischargedveterans and their families. One mother whose son had told her that his
undesirabledischargewas on account of homosexualitycalled the War Department
to ask for clarification."They told me," she reportedto her son, "thatevery soldier
who does not hold a dishonorabledischargeis entitled to the G.I. [Bill of] Rights."
Trying to allay her son'sfearsthat he would receivenothing for his time in the service, his mother incorrectlyreassuredhim, "I think someone is trying to hand you a
terrificline. . . . No one can see how they can withhold [yourbenefits]."24
The economic value of the benefitswas extremelyimportantto many veterans."If
anything should prevent my future education,"worried one veteran dischargedfor
homosexuality,"I'dbe sunk becausethe money to carryon myselfis simply not available."Going to college on the G.I. Bill or buying a house or startinga businesswith
a VA loan were indeed criticalsteps toward occupationalachievementand financial
stability.But it was not the economic benefits alone that made the G.I. Bill important to veterans.Collecting on the entitlementsof the programalso broughthonor to
many familieswho had neversent a son or daughterto college or had neverowned a
home. Just as collecting benefits conferred honor on the recipient, the economic
costs of being denied G.I. Bill benefitscould not be separatedfrom the stigma of the
discharge."The Veterans'Administrationis taking such an attitude and if they can
get any control regardingthe G.I. Bill of Rights, my life will be ruined,"one soldier
wrote another. "The Millhizersare not wealthy and without the aid of the government, school is practicallyout of the question and if my family ever found out it
would be awful, becauseMotherworshipsthe ground I walk on and she could never
take it." The letter of another soldier dischargedfor homosexualityexpressedthe
inseparabilityof the stigma from the economic penaltiesof the discharge:
23 Current Biography1944, 298; Commander-in-Chief Atlantic and U.S. Atlantic Fleet to Secretary of
Defense, June 1946, file 292, box 800, Decimal File G-1 Personnel,Recordsof the War Department General and
Special Staffs. On the opposition of trade unionists to universalentitlement programslest such programscreate
"cringing"and dependent men, see Kessler-Harris,In Pursuit of Equity,68. Postwar culture tended to conflate
effeminacy,weakness, and homosexuality.The connections between degenerationdue to excessivesocial provision
and the threat of same-sex sexuality that figured in domestic social policy had a counterpartin Cold War foreign
policy. See, for example, K. A. Cuordileone, "'Politicsin an Age of Anxiety': Cold War Political Culture and the
Crisis in American Masculinity, 1949-1960," JournalofAmericanHistory,87 (Sept. 2000), 515-45; and Robert L.
Griswold, "The 'FlabbyAmerican,' the Body, and the Cold War,"in A SharedExperience:Men, Women,and the
Historyof Gender,ed. LauraMcCall and Donald Yacovone(New York, 1998), 323-48.
24Mother to "Dear,"1944, box 4, World War II Project Records (Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, and Transgender
Historical Society of Northern California, San Francisco, Calif.). The World War II Project Records comprise
mostly the primary sources Berubd collected while researching Coming Out under Fire. I am very grateful to
B&rubefor making those sourcesavailableto other researchers.
This content downloaded from 74.10.198.56 on Tue, 3 Dec 2013 14:21:45 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
946
TheJournalof AmericanHistory
December2003
Now I'mup againstit. Whatis painfullyembarrassing
is that[blue]discharge....
Be kickedaroundbecausethingsgot too muchforme to
Whatam I to do?Starve?
bear?BecauseI reallyam in need, and unemployed,and willingand able to reor otherwise,so I can disprove
enlist,if only theywill takeme on, provisionally
onceandforallwhatnonsenseappearsin my caserecord.25
The stigmaof the blue dischargewas exacerbatedby its associationwith homosexuality.These soldiersbear "thestigmatizationof an 'otherthan honorable'discharge
and must face all the problems of explanationat home," reportedan army captain,
"especiallywhen the reason,such as homosexuality,has been a guardedsecret."But
different families handled the stigma differently."I really can't see where you can
think that coming home would be anything desperateto face,"one mother told her
son. "We all know dozens of boys who are out of the service on psychiatricdischarges."She attemptedto calm her son'sfearsthat friendsand neighborswould discover his blue discharge. "Have you ever seen daddy's discharge?Did anyone
importantever ask to see it?Are you sure that it was an honorableone?"26
But despite this mother'sassurances,employersand universitiesdid ask to see dischargepapers, often with devastatingresults for veterans. "These 'blues'do hold a
veteranback in so many ways,"commented a soldier who had been denied his prewar position afteran employersaw his blue discharge."I reallyam ... determinedto
clear myself,"another veteranwrote, "it is an obstacle, and I can'ttolerateit much
longer."Indeed, governmentand militaryofficialsbegan to worry that the denial of
rights and benefits stigmatizedundesirablydischargedsoldiersso severelythat they
were unable to reentersociety.The "individualis not going to become a very useful
citizen to society if he is walking aroundwith a blue discharge,"CongressmanB. W.
Kearneyfrettedduring debate on the G.I. Bill. A decade later,the navy's1956 Crittendon Report warned that "the service is creating a group of unemployablesby
[issuing]the undesirabledischarges."Many World War II soldiers-especially those
who had been drafted-came home enragedthat their blue dischargeswere actually
closing doors that were open to them before the war. "I cannot preventmyself from
feeling outragedat the injustice of the government'sreturningme to a society with
whose contempt I shall be in constant struggle,"one man wrote in a letter,"andfurther burdening me with the stigma which is automaticallyattached to the person
receivinga [blue discharge]."27
Faced with both social stigma and the loss of benefits, veteransresponded in a
varietyof ways. Some disregardedthe blue dischargeand appliedfor benefitsanyway.
"I filed an appealat the Veterans'Administrationin KansasCity to claim compensation for a nervouscondition sustainedin the Service,"one soldier told a friend, pre25Milqui to Harold, March 6, Feb. 20, 1945, box 4, ibid.; Francescoto VAAdministratorOmar Bradley,Oct.
19, 1945, case 4217128, Veterans'Claims Service,obtained through Freedomof InformationAct (FOIA)requestto
Department of VeteransAffairs (in Canaday'spossession).
26Wilson R. G. Bender, "Rehabilitationand the Returning Veteran,"Mental Hygiene, 29 (Jan. 1945), 29;
Mother to Harold, 1944, Nov. 1944, box 4, World War II ProjectRecords.
27 Soldier to Sen. ListerHill,
Aug. 28, 1946, box 6, World War II ProjectRecords;Francescoto Maj. Frederick
Vater,May 6, 1945, case 4217128, Veterans'Claims Service (in Canaday'spossession); CongressionalRecord,78
Cong., 2 sess., May 12 1944, p. 4454; E. LawrenceGibson, Get offMy Ship (New York, 1978), 361; Harold to
Blanche, Nov. 18, 1944, box 4, World War II ProjectRecords.
This content downloaded from 74.10.198.56 on Tue, 3 Dec 2013 14:21:45 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
SexualityandSocialCitizenshipundertheG.I. Bill
947
dicting that his claim would be rejectedas a result of his blue discharge.Another
veterantold of an acquaintancewith a blue dischargewho "wasgetting his readjustment allowance."But receivingbenefits in the first instance offeredno assuranceof
keeping them. One Floridaveteran, for example, was dischargedfrom the navy in
1944 for engagingin consensualhomosexualactivities.Despite his blue discharge,he
initiallyused his G.I. Bill benefitsto enroll at the LaFranceSchool of BeautyCulture
in Miami. Things were going well for him-the school receivedfive hundreddollars
a year for tuition and the veteran receivedan allowanceof fifty dollars a monthuntil he was featuredin an articlein the Miami Herald.An official in the navy (who
apparentlyknew the sailor and was familiarwith the circumstancessurroundinghis
discharge)saw the articleand wrote to the vA to ask "ifall navalpersonneldischarged
for [homosexuality]will receivethe benefitsof the laws administeredby the Veterans'
Administration?"VAheadquartersin Washingtonthen notified the local office in Bay
Pines, Florida,that the veteranwas ineligiblefor benefits.28
Indeed, it was not at all uncommon for the vA to be aggressivein correctingits
mistakes."The V.A. is hep againstthese Blue bastardsas they told me,"observedone
undesirable."My friend Louie is still going to school under his own power and simply takes things as they come,"wrote one soldier to a friend. "He recentlyreceiveda
letter from the [VA]'requesting'him to pay back to the United States Treasurythe
sum of $475 that he receivedunder the G.I. Bill."Another soldierwho was undesirably dischargedfor homosexualitymanagedto qualifyfor G.I. Bill benefits and used
them to obtain his bachelor'sdegree.After the VAdiscoveredthe error,the agencynot
only demanded repayment but threatened the young man with a civil suit and
imprisonmentfor receivingmoney under false pretenses.The soldier contacted the
Henry Foundation,which then enlisted the help of a U.S. senatorto obtain a waiver
from the VeteransAdministrationfor the soldier.29
Facedwith the specterof the vA coming afterthem, many veteransdid not claim
benefits directlybut used establishedchannelsto protest the denial of an honorable
discharge.In the text of the G.I. Bill, Congresshad providedfor the establishmentof
boards of review within all branchesof service. An undesirablydischargedservice
member'sonly recoursewas to go before a boardof reviewto requestthat his or her
discharge be upgraded to honorable. Some soldiers who decided to fight for an
upgradeblamed the militaryfor what had happened to them. "When I enteredthe
army I had certain homosexual tendencies,"one explained in a letter to a friend.
"Armylife developed them into traits of characterwhich I will never be able to
change. [This camp] has done the most damageto me and it was here that I fell into
a clique of homosexualsthat has brought me into the classificationof 'confirmed.'"
28 Bob to Harold, Nov. 28, 1944, box 4, World War II ProjectRecords;Francescoto VeteransAdministration,
New York,Dec. 29, 1945, case 4217128, Veterans'Claims Service (in Canaday'spossession);Bureauof Naval Personnel to VeteransAdministration, "EnlistedPersonnel Dischargedwith UndesirableDischarges-Veterans' Benefits," memo, March 15, 1945, vol. 2, Policy Series 800.04, Records of the Department of VeteransAffairs;
District Civil ReadjustmentOfficer, U.S. Naval Reserve,to Chief of Staff, 7th Naval District, Feb. 21, 1945, ibid.;
and Hines to Bureauof Naval Personnel,March 25, 1945, ibid.
29 Bob to Harold, Nov. 28, 1944, box 4, World War II Project Records;Milqui to Harold, Sept. 20, 1945,
ibid.; Henry, "Reportof the Psychiatrist-in-Chief,"4-5.
This content downloaded from 74.10.198.56 on Tue, 3 Dec 2013 14:21:45 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
948
TheJournal
ofAmerican
History
December
2003
The samesoldier'smotherconcurredthatthe militarywasresponsiblefor her son's
state."Sincethe armyhashad a largepartin tearingdownyourhealthand mental
she told him, "Isee no reasonwhy theyshouldnot assumeat leastpartof
abilities,"
the responsibility
forbuildingyou up again."30
As suchveteranswentthroughtheappealsprocesstheysoughtout otherrecipients
of bluedischarges
forhelpandadvice."I'dappreciate
anyconcreteadviceandprocedureyou cangiveon howto handletheVeterans'
one veteranwrote
Administration,"
another.Undesirably
soldiersmonitoredthesituationandkepteachother
discharged
or
of
apprised legal politicalchanges.Thissamesoldiertoldhis friendof a newspaper
articlehe had readaboutthe blue discharges."Thearticlestatedthat none of the
stigmaof the dishonorable
dischargeis to go alongwith the blueandthatwe areto
receiveall the benefitsof the G.I. Bill.""31
Blue dischargesreachedout not only to one another,but to a whole myriadof
forassistance.
The Veterans'
AffairsOfficeof the NationalAssociation
organizations
for the Advancementof ColoredPeople(NAACP)
devotedmost of its resourcesto
African
Americans
who
had
blue
received
helping
discharges,some of whom had
been dischargedfor homosexuality,
Some
upgradetheirdischargesto honorable.32
wroteto theACLu-one mandischarged
forhomosexuality
bluedischarges
contacted
the ACLUto recommendhimselfas a "suitableplaintiff"shouldthe ACLU
decideto
Hines'sarbitrary
In
rulingwhichdeniesveterans'rights."33
fight"[vAAdministrator]
New YorkCity the Henry Foundationhelped undesirablydischargedveterans
with theAmericanRedCrossandthe
directly,andthe foundationalsocorresponded
AmericanLegionregardingsoldiersdischargedfor homosexuality.Finally,many
soldierswroteto membersof Congress,someof whomwere
undesirably
discharged
vexed
by the situationof the bluedischarges.34
becomingincreasingly
When Congressenactedthe G.I. Bill,membershad expressedconcernthatsoldiers
whowereundesirably
wouldbe unfairlydeniedbenefits.The finalversion
discharged
of the legislationtheypassed-which createdboardsof reviewwithineachbranchof
the service-reflectedthat concern.While soldierscould attemptto upgradetheir
discharges
throughthe boards,Congressdid not havethe foresightto establishany
30Harold to Blanche, Nov. 18, 1944, box 4, World War II
ProjectRecords;"Maw"to Harold, Nov. 20, 1944,
ibid.
31 Milqui to Harold,
April 12, 1945, Jan. 8, 1946, ibid.
32 See box 59, Defense Department and War Department Correspondence, 1948-1951, part I, Washington
Bureau, Papersof the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (Libraryof Congress, Washington, D.C.).
33In this case, the American Civil LibertiesUnion (ACLU) declined to take action, since it avoided cases where
it appearedthat homosexual acts had occurred. But ACLU
lawyersread Donald Webster Cory's TheHomosexualin
Americaand expressedconcern about possible vAdiscriminationagainsthomosexuals.EdwardHeghinian to Alan
Reitman, Nov. 28, 1951, folder 1, box 1127,"Military Discharges,"American Civil Liberties Union Collection
(Seely G. Mudd Archives,Princeton University,Princeton, N.J.).
34Henry, "Reportof the Psychiatrist-in-Chief,"9; Alfred A. Gross to Charles Cook, Nov. 3, 1949, box 62,
Society for the Preventionof Crime Papers;George W. Henry,All the Sexes:A StudyofMasculinityand Femininity
(Toronto, 1955), 372. See, for example, George E. Brown, Veterans'Claims Service, to CongressmanVito Marcantonio, Jan. 1946, Policy Series 800, Records of the Department of VeteransAffairs;Marcantonio to Bradley,
Dec. 22, 1945, ibid.; Civilian Aide to Secretaryof War and MarshallP. Patton, May 8, 1947, Recordsof the Civil-
This content downloaded from 74.10.198.56 on Tue, 3 Dec 2013 14:21:45 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
SexualityandSocialCitizenshipunderthe G.I.Bill
949
appealmechanismwithin the VAitself.As membersof Congressbecame increasingly
aware of the number of blue dischargesdenied benefits by VAadjudicators,some
membersbegan to feel that the VAwas violating the generousintent of the G.I. Bill.
Congressionalfrustrationwith the vA'spolicy on blue dischargesfirst surfacedin
fall 1945. Race, not sexuality,was the initial basis of congressionalconcern, as eviRecorda seriesof edidenced by Sen. Edwin Johnson'sreadinginto the Congressional
torials on the injustice of the blue dischargefrom an AfricanAmericanpaper, the
PittsburghCourier."There should not be a twilight zone between innocence and
guilt,"Johnson remarkedon the floor of the Senate. But congressionalcriticism of
the VA'spolicy centered in the Democratic-chairedHouse Committee on Military
Affairs.Concernedabout the plight of veterans,seven membersof the Committee on
Military Affairsformed a special committee that held hearingsin fall 1945 and in
January1946 produceda remarkablegovernmentdocument protestingthe VApolicy
on blue discharges.In explaining that the blue dischargetargeted those who had
committed misconduct,including "sodomyor sex perversion,"and those who exhibited undesirabletraits of character,including "psychopathicpersonalitymanifested
by homosexuality,"the authorsof the reportclearlyconsideredsoldiersdischargedfor
homosexualityas among the victims of the vA'spolicy. But in contrastto the vA policy, which singled out soldiers dischargedfor homosexuality,in making its case for
the more liberalextension of benefits, the special committee did not sharplydistinguish between soldiersdischargedfor homosexualityand other recipientsof blue discharges.35
Even so, the committee seemed to recognizethat the associationbetween the blue
dischargeand homosexualityexacerbatedits stigma. The languageof the discharge,
between honorable and dishonorable,gave the impression"thatthere is something
radicallywrong with the man in question,"the committeewrote, "somethingso mysteriousthat it cannot be talkedabout or written down, but must be left to the imagination." The very vagueness of the discharge meant that "moral suspicions are
aroused."The stigmasurroundingthe blue dischargewas so powerful,the committee
complained,that many of those facingan undesirabledischarge"havebeen known to
ask for an out-and-out dishonorabledischarge."The reportexpressedamazementat
the numbers who had come forwardto complain, thus "publicizingthe stigma of
having been dischargedfrom the Army undercircumstanceswhich savorof disgrace."
But those who complainedsurelyspokefor thousandsmore, "whofeel the samesense
of injusticebut preferto bury their hurt in as much oblivion as possible."36
ian Aide to the Secretaryof War, Subject File, 1940-1947, Recordsof the Office of the Secretaryof War, 17911947, RG107 (National Archives,College Park,Md.); civilian aide'snotes concerning cases of individual blue discharges, ibid.; Soldier to Hill, Aug. 28, 1946, box 6, World War II Project Records;Sen. C. Wayland Brooks to
Vice Adm. Ross T. McIntire, Navy Department, July 18, 1944, box 13, ibid.; letter to Hon. Michael Kirwin, file
949, box 86, AGOLegislativeand Policy PrecedentFiles, Recordsof the Adjutant General'sOffice.
35The Special Committee of the Committee on Military Affairsthat authored the report on blue discharges
comprised Chairman Carl Durham (D., North Carolina), Robert L. E Sikes (D., Florida),Arthur Winstead (D.,
Mississippi), Melvin Price (D., Illinois), Thomas E. Martin (R., Iowa), Ivor D. Fenton (R., Pennsylvania),and
J. LeroyJohnson (R., California). Many of them were veteransof World War I or World War II. Appendixto the
Record,79 Cong., 1 sess. (1945), p. A4778; Committee on MilitaryAffairs,Blue Discharges,2.
Congressional
36 Committee on MilitaryAffairs,Blue Discharges,6, 7, 6, 1.
This content downloaded from 74.10.198.56 on Tue, 3 Dec 2013 14:21:45 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
950
TheJournalof AmericanHistory
December2003
The report protested the unfairnessof the blue discharge.Soldiers caught in its
web were denied the proceduralprotections provided to soldiers who were courtmartialed.The officerswho awardedthe blue dischargeswere not bound by rules of
evidence. The militarydenied candidatesfor blue dischargescounsel, and it did not
providethem with a recordof hearingproceedings.Its victims were young, inexperienced men and women whose mistakeswere often quite minor. The blue discharge
would prevent them from receiving benefits, make postwar employment difficult,
cause them to be denied admissionto many collegesand universities,and, the report
claimed, "depressand torturethem for the rest of their days."The fact that many of
these soldiershad been draftedmade the membersof the committee especiallysympathetic. "Some succumbed to temptations they never met until they entered the
Army,"the committee wrote, most likely referencingthe unprecedentedopportunity
that life in the militaryduring World War II providedfor homosexualactivity.The
army should eject such men and women from the service, the reportargued, but it
should not make the "restof their lives grievous."37
The committee was particularlyincensed that the VAhad usurpedcongressional
authorityin its refusalof benefitsto blue discharges.The reportarguedthat the law's
awkwardphraseology,"underconditions other than dishonorable,"reflecteda clear
congressionaldesire to distributebenefits broadly.Congress"intendedthat all persons not actuallygiven a dishonorabledischargeshould profit by this generosity."By
evaluatingeach undesirabledischargeas either underhonorableor dishonorableconditions, the VArefusedto "takethe dischargeat its face value."The committee called
the VApolicy "illogical"and "disingenuous."Assertingthat the VAhad secured the
supportof the War Department,the reportcalled the currentpolicy a "squeezeplay"
by the two agencies.The VAexercised"somethinglike court martialjurisdiction"over
soldierswhom the "Armyhas been unable or unwilling to subject to dishonorable
dischargeby court martial."The 1946 report concluded with strong recommendations that the VAbe stopped "frompassingmoral verdictson the history of any soldier"and be required"toacceptall veteransbut those expresslyexcludedby Congress
in ... [the G.I. Bill]." Moreover,the committee urged that the blue dischargebe
eliminated; instead, soldiers demonstrating"inaptness"or "inadaptability"should
receivea dischargeunderhonorableconditions.38
As a result of this congressionalpressure,the militarymoved to correctpast inequities. "The majordifficulty resultingfrom the past use of the blue dischargeis that
causesfor separationshave rangedfrom honorableto dishonorable,"Brig. Gen. John
L. Pierce, the presidentof the secretaryof war'sDischargeReview Board,explained
in a memo. "[Some] government agencies and some industries are attempting to
determinewhether the blue dischargee'sseparationwas under honorableor dishonorableconditions as a prerequisiteto either benefitsor employment."But the general
37Ibid.,10-11.
38 Ibid., 8, 9, 14. The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) raised similar
objections, noting that the "Veterans'Administration has ruled that the 'other than dishonorable'clause in the
G.I. Bill eliminates most blue discharges,even though the interpretationof this phrase in Army language would
admit such persons."William H. Hastie and JessieDedmon to WalterWhite, March 9, 1946, box G-18, group II,
NAACP
Papers.
This content downloaded from 74.10.198.56 on Tue, 3 Dec 2013 14:21:45 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
SexualityandSocialCitizenshipunderthe G.I. Bill
951
explainedthat often no such distinctionswere made, and sometimes blue discharges
were automaticallyconsidereddishonorable."In some instancesthis same view of a
blue dischargeundoubtedlyaffectsthe individual'sstandingwithin his community,"
Pierceconcluded.39
To addressthe issues that the Committee on MilitaryAffairshad raised,the army
replacedthe blue dischargewith a "generaldischarge"for unsuitabilityin 1947. The
general dischargewas considered under honorable conditions, "grantedto those
found unsuitableas inept but who otherwisemeet all qualificationsfor an honorable
discharge."Those who received the general dischargewere eligible for all benefits.
Simultaneously,for more seriousoffenses,the militarypreservedthe undesirabledischarge,to be awardedwithout benefits under dishonorableconditions "forunfitness
or misconductas a resultof administrativeaction.""40
But the spiritof reformonly brieflyincluded soldierschargedwith homosexuality.
The militaryexperimentedwith awardinghonorabledischarges(as distinct from the
generaldischargeunder honorableconditions) to soldierswho had homosexualtendencies from late 1945 to 1947, but after this brief period of leniency, the military
revertedto giving undesirabledischargesto soldierswho either committed homosexual acts or had homosexualtendencies.41And the VAcontinued to treatthose soldiers
as ineligiblefor benefits.42
Well into the 1950s, many membersof Congressremainedconcernedabout soldiers
who were undesirablydischarged."Congresshas interesteditself in the field of discharges,particularlyundesirabledischarges,"noted a 1957 Department of Defense
(DOD)memo. By the mid-1950s, in responseto an apparentresurgencein the use of
the undesirabledischarge,members of the House had launched a sustained battle
with the secretaryof defense'soffice, hoping to do something for undesirablydischargedsoldiers,who sufferedconsequencesout of proportionto their offenseswhile
in the military.In 1957 CongressmanClyde Doyle proposedlegislationthat would
enablesoldiersto upgradeundesirabledischargesif they could provethat their "char39Brig. Gen. John L. Pierce to War Department General Staff, memo, May 13, 1946, file 949, box 86, AGO
Legislativeand Policy PrecedentFiles, Recordsof the Adjutant General'sOffice.
40Both "inept"and "inaptness"were used in referenceto soldiers eligible for the general discharge.New York
Times,May 21, 1947, p. 4; Committee on MilitaryAffairs,Blue Discharges,14.
41 From October 1945 to 1947, the War Department mandated that enlisted personnel with homosexual tendencies who had committed no homosexual acts in service be granted honorable discharges.In 1947 this lenient
policy was reversed:although soldierswith homosexual tendencies who had not committed homosexual acts were
technically eligible for an honorable discharge, most so charged received undesirabledischarges,as did soldiers
who had engaged in consensualhomosexual acts. See LouisJolyon West and AlbertJ. Glass, "SexualBehaviorand
the Military Law,"in SexualBehaviorand the Law, ed. Ralph Slovenko (Springfield, 1965), 254-55; and Colin J.
Williams and Martin S. Weinberg, Homosexualsand the Military:A Studyof Less Than HonorableDischarge(New
York, 1971), 26-29.
42
B&rube,Coming Out underFire, 230. See also R. J. Novotny, Assistant Deputy Administrator,to Manager,
requestto Department of VetVARegional Office, Los Angeles, California,Jan. 24, 1955, obtained through FOIA
eransAffairs (in Canaday'spossession). In 1979 the VAruled that only homosexual acts involving aggravatingcircumstances would constitute dishonorable conditions and preclude benefits. Keith Snyder, "V.A. Eases Bar to
Benefits for Certain Homosexual Veterans,"Clearinghouse
Review,13 (March 1980), 878; KatherineBourdonnay,
Issues(Chicago, 1985), 100.
FightingBack:Lesbianand GayDraft, Military,and Veterans'
This content downloaded from 74.10.198.56 on Tue, 3 Dec 2013 14:21:45 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
952
TheJournalof AmericanHistory
December2003
acter, conduct, activities, and habits since [being] granted [the] original discharge
[had] been good for . .. not less than three years."The proposedbill eliminatedthe
stigma of an undesirabledischargefor those who had acted as good citizens in civilian life. But because the bill stipulated that soldiers who had their discharges
upgraded would receive no additional benefits-the reform would only remove
"unearnedstigma [from] deserving men and women"-the bill also preservedthe
military'sfundamentalprinciplethat benefitswould go to good soldiersratherthan
goodcivilians.43
In manywaysan outgrowthof the 1946 HousereportBlueDischarges,
this later
to
of
in
undesirable
one
critical
differed
campaign help recipients
discharges
aspect.
In the yearsimmediatelyfollowingWorldWarII, lawmakers
had been concerned
with thefateof all bluedischargees.
The 1946 reportincludedsoldiersdischarged
for
as
those
victimized
the
benefits
VA's
homosexuality among
unfairly
by
policyindeed,the reportdid not alwaysdistinguishbetweenthemandothersreceivingblue
The 1957 Doylebill eliminatedsuchblurriness.
Its intentwasto salvage
discharges.
of thosewhosufferedfromtheassociation
the reputations
betweenthebluedischarge
an associationthathadbecomemorestigmatizing
andhomosexuality,
as the linkage
betweenCommunismandhomosexuality
the
of the early
red
scare
tightenedduring
1950s.Sincethe legislationwouldhaveno impacton benefits,its onlyeffectseemed
to be to markcertainundesirably
soldiersas nonhomosexuals.
discharged
his
and
saw
the
a long-standDoyle
proposedlegislationas addressing
colleagues
"An
admitted
or
an
user
of
is awarded
admitted
narcotics
homosexual,
ing inequity:
an undesirable
noteda reportby Doyle'sspecialsubcommitteeon milidischarge,"
is
the manwho is discharged
forcommit"So,
also,
tarydischarges.
administratively
a
series
of
offenses."
Was
it
asked
the
committee's
reasonable,
ting
petty
attorney,
John Blandford,duringhearingson militarydischarges,"thislumpingtogether"of
undesirably
dischargedveterans"with. . . homo[s]?"Shoulda boy who had gone
AWOL
on severaloccasions,he asked,"gothroughhis lifewiththe samestigmaasone
who is an admittedhomosexual?"
To makehis point,Blandfordaskeda Department
of Defenseofficialif, in givingout dinnerinvitations,he woulddistinguishbetween
homosexuals
andotherswith bluedischarges.
"Icertainlywouldnot be ... anxious
to invitehomosexuals
to my home,"the officialreplied.The Housereporton thelegislationurgedthat"immediate
stepsbe takento differentiate
by classamongthevarioustypesof undesirable
discharges."44
43 Ad Hoc Committee on AdministrativeDischarges, memo, c. 1957, file 211, box 36, AGO Legislativeand
Policy PrecedentFiles, Recordsof the Adjutant General'sOffice. On the rise of undesirabledischargerates in the
mid-1950s, see "AdministrativeDischarges:Policies, Procedures,Criteria,"Feb. 1960, p. 9, ibid. U.S. Congress,
House, Committee on Armed Services,HearingsbeforeSpecialSubcommitteeon H.R. 1108, 85 Cong., 1 sess., June
24, 1957; Congressional
Record,85 Cong., 1 sess., Aug. 5, 1957, p. 13666. After committee hearings, the Doyle
bill was redraftedand introduced as H.R. 8722. The new bill made more explicit that the armed serviceswere
requiredto consider good conduct in civil life but could consider it in tandem with the circumstancesof the original discharge.
44 U.S. Congress, House, Committee on Armed Services,Hearingson H.R. 8722, 85 Cong., 1 sess., July 23,
1957, p. 3217; Committee on Armed Services,HearingsbeforeSpecialSubcommitteeon H.R. 1108, 2379, 2366;
U.S. Congress, House, Committee on Armed Services,House Reportto AccompanyH.R. 8722, 85 Cong., 1 sess.,
July 23, 1957, p. 6.
This content downloaded from 74.10.198.56 on Tue, 3 Dec 2013 14:21:45 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
undertheG.I.Bill
andSocialCitizenship
Sexuality
953
The methodof differentiation
varied.Initially,thelegislationproposedto givesoldiersan upgradeddischarge,but the militarybalkedat the ideathatcivilianconduct
shouldhaveanybearingon one'smilitaryservicerecord.In a gestureof compromise
with the secretary
of defense,Doylelaterintroducedlegislationthatwouldallowthe
originaldischargeto standbut providedsoldierswithgood civilianbehaviorwith an
thattheycouldshowto prospective
Rehabilitation
Certificate"
"Exemplary
employers.Bothproposalsaimedto providea wayto distinguishthoseindividuals
whowere
in the acceptedsenseof the wordandwho [had]established
not "undesirables
themselvesin societyfollowingtheirseparation
fromthe service."45
Sincethe Doyle legislationwas designed,in part,to giveundesirably
discharged
soldiersa wayto proveto prospective
employersandcommunitymembersthatthey
werenot homosexual,it is hardlysurprising
thata respectable
heterosexual
life-style
wasone wayto demonstrate
the civicgoodbehaviorthatDoyle'scommitteepointed
to asentitlinga veteranto a freshstart.One undesirably
soldier,forexamdischarged
ple, waslatereturningfromleaveon severaloccasions.But "aftergettingout of the
service,he hasassumedthe positionof a man,"one congressman
explained,"andhas
done a verycommendable
of
for
his
Another
man,described
family."
job providing
duringhearingsas the sortthatthe proposedlegislationcouldhelp,returnedhome
with his undesirable
dischargeand "hasaccepteda positionin a truckingfirm,hasa
of
his
and
hasbecomea verygood citizen."Yetanothersoldier"madea
own,
family
fool of himselfon [liquor]"whenhe wasin the service.But afterbeinggivena blue
discharge,the man married,obtaineda decentjob, and had two children."He
loanto acquirea homeforhis children,his wife,andhimwantedto get a veteran's
wouldnot
self,"the authorof the bill reported.The legislationunderconsideration
makea loan availableto sucha man,but it wouldconferon him a symbolof firstclasscitizenship.The proposedlegislationthus protectedcertainsoldiersand their
familiesfrom the stigmaof the undesirabledischarge.In this way, the Doyle bill
stoodin contrastto currentdischarge
policywhich,as one congressman
pointedout,
left young fathersholdingdischargepapersthat theirsons would not understand
All "the8 yearold . . . sees,"this conwhen they foundthem in "daddy's
drawer."
gressmanconcluded,"isundesirable."46
Fortymembersof Congresshad introducedsimilaror identicalbills, and the
Doyle bill passedthe House with nearlyunanimoussupport.But the military
stronglyobjectedto the bill on the groundsthatmilitarydisciplinewouldbe damagedif the Congressviolatedthe military'sbasicprinciplethat "anhonorablediswhen the
Accordingly,
chargeshouldbe givenonly for honorablemilitaryservice."
SenateArmed ServicesCommittee askedfor the Pentagon'sreporton the legislation,
the Pentagonstalledfor two and a half months, long enough that the legislationdied
in Senate committee. But Doyle was tenacious, continuing to reintroducea version
of the bill in severalfollowing sessionsof Congress.Eachtime, the bill receivedunanRecord,86 Cong., 1 sess., Jan. 27, 1959, pp. 1213-14; ibid., June 2, 1959, p. 9575; Commit45Congressional
tee on Armed Services,HouseReportto AccompanyH.R. 8722, 6.
Record,85 Cong., 1 sess., Aug. 5, 1957, p. 13674; Committee on Armed Services,Hearings
46 Congressional
beforeSpecialSubcommitteeon H.R. 1108, 2606, 2476, 2379.
This content downloaded from 74.10.198.56 on Tue, 3 Dec 2013 14:21:45 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
954
TheJournal
ofAmerican
History
December
2003
imous or nearlyunanimoussupportin the House only to be blockedby military
veroppositionon the Senateside.Finally,in 1966, Congresspasseda watered-down
sion of the bill.It specifiedthatthe secretary
of labor(ratherthanthe Departmentof
whichwouldin no
the
Rehabilitation
would
issue
Certificate,"
Defense)
"Exemplary
affect
the
way
originalmilitarydischarge.47
withCongressman
Whilethe militarystronglydisagreed
Doyle'sassertionthatthe
was
often
the
undesirable
too
punitive, Departmentof Defenseand condischarge
of
the
bill
for
Doyle agreedaboutone thing:soldiersdischarged
proponents
gressional
did notdeservelenienttreatment.An internal1957 DODmemothat
homosexuality
administrative
proposed
dischargepolicyin orderto avoid
changesto the military's
of
for
the
"thenecessity legislation
by ... [Doyle]"warnedagainst
typerepresented
any changesthat would removethe military'sauthorityto dischargehomosexuals.
haveagreedwiththisprovisionof theproposedpolClydeDoylewouldundoubtedly
the
floor
of
the
On
House,Doyleexplainedthathe haddecidedthatthe undesiricy.
able dischargehad some value (and should not be eliminatedentirely)when he
where"individuals
admitto having
thoughtof the situation,"trueof homosexuals,"
traitsbut cannot. .. be legallyconvictedbycourtmartial.""48
certainundesirable
certainsoldierswasitselfa
The waythe Doylelegislationproposedto rehabilitate
an
become
evenmorestigmatizstatement
that
undesirable
had
powerful
discharge
in
than
it
was
after
War
The
the
World
1950s
II.
immediately
greaterstigmawas
ing
the resultof two factors:First,in responseto the 1946 House reporton blue disto someof thosewhosedischarges,themilitaryhadbegunto givegeneraldischarges
In
fell
between
honorable
dishonorable.
and
makingthe generaldischarge
charges
to soldiersdischargedfor homosexuality-andin continuingthe World
unavailable
WarII-erapracticeof usingthe undesirable
dischargein such cases-the military
the
association
between
and homosexuality.
Second,the
undesirability
heightened
increasingcentralityof homophobiain 1950spoliticalculture-expressedmostvivin the federalgovernidly in a 1950 congressional
investigationinto "sexperverts"
one'sundesirable
ment-made the suspicionthathomosexuality
lurk
behind
might
afterthewar."49
dischargeevenmoredamagingthanit hadbeenimmediately
47Committee on Armed Services,HearingsbeforeSpecialSubcommitteeon H.R. 1108, 2359. A legislativehistory is provided in U.S. Congress, House, Committee on Armed Services,Hearingson H.R. 16646, H.R. 15053,
andH.R. 10267, 89 Cong., 2 sess., July 26, 1966, p. 10286. The bill was enacted as Pub. L. No. 89-690, 80 Stat.
1017 (1966). Congressional
Record,89 Cong., 2 sess., Oct. 4, 1966, p. 25083; ibid., Oct. 18, 1966, p. 27390.
48ProposedDODDirective, May 6, 1957, file 211, box 37, AGOLegislativeand Policy PrecedentFiles, Records
of the Adjutant General'sOffice. Congressional
Record,85 Cong., 1 sess., Aug. 5, 1957, p. 133667. Clyde Doyle's
position on homosexualitydid not stop the Department of Defense (DOD)from exploiting homosexualityto argue
against the bill: "Should H.R. 1108 be enacted,"the DODwrote, "aperson administrativelydischargedas a homosexual ... could demand that he be issued the same type of honorable dischargeto which a combat veteranwith a
splendid recordwould be entitled, simply by establishingthat his post-serviceconduct had been good." Committee on Armed Services,HouseReportto AccompanyH.R. 8722, 11.
49 U.S. Congress, Senate, Committee on Expendituresin Executive Departments, Employment
ofHomosexuals
and OtherSex Pervertsin Government,81 Cong., 2 sess., 1950. On Cold War homophobia and political culture
more generally,see Cuordileone, "'Politicsin an Age of Anxiety"';John D'Emilio, Making Trouble:Essayson Gay
History,Politics,and the University(New York, 1992), 57-73; David KennethJohnson, "The LavenderScare:Gays
and Lesbians in the Federal Civil Service, 1945-1975" (Ph.D. diss., Northwestern University,2000); and Randolph William Baxter, "'EradicatingThis Menace': Homophobia and Anti-Communism in Congress, 19471955" (Ph.D. diss., Universityof California,Irvine, 1999).
This content downloaded from 74.10.198.56 on Tue, 3 Dec 2013 14:21:45 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
SexualityandSocialCitizenshipunderthe G.I. Bill
955
The impulse to protect some undesirablydischargedveteransfrom the stigma of
homosexualitywas a majorimpetus behind the Doyle bill in its variousincarnations.
After its enactment, the legislationhelped to lessen the stigma of homosexualityfor
some undesirablydischarged(presumably)heterosexualsoldiers,while leaving them
in a benefitlesslimbo of good citizenship.50That legislatorswere not more concerned
with restoringbenefitsto those soldiersis evidencenot only of how much closerCongress had moved to the VAin its antipathy toward homosexualitybut also of how
much further it had moved from New Deal aspirationsto distributestate resources
broadlyamong the citizenry.
In the postwarperiod, the G.I. Bill of Rightswas one of the primaryinstrumentsthat
the state used to channel resourcestowardthe citizenry.The right of soldiersto the
basic economic entitlementsthat would enable them to be productivecitizenswould
have perfectlyexemplifiedsocial citizenshipas T. H. Marshalldefined it, if such entitlements had been extendedbroadlyto the entire citizenry.But social citizenship-as
it grewon Americansoil-ended up being a good deal less democraticthan Marshall
might have hoped, and not only because the basic provisionsof the G.I. Bill were
never extended beyond soldiers. Rather, as Marshallrecognized, social citizenship
both possessedgreatdemocraticpotential and operatedas an "architectof... social
inequality."51
An examinationof the VA'spolicy on homosexualityillustratesthis point particularlywell. A majorityof the male and femalesoldierswho experiencedor acted upon
homosexual desire during World War II wereG.I. Bill beneficiaries."Youknow as
well as I that there have been many 'homosexuals'in the Navy and the Army,"one
soldier franklytold Secretaryof the Navy Forrestal,and "thatmany have been discharged'underhonorableconditions'becausethey were undiscovered."The surgeon
generalof the armyconceded in 1946 that "followingconfidentialresearchstudies it
is known that homosexualswere inducted into the service"and that "mostof them
These soldierswere able to use G.I. Bill benefitsto start
servedlong and faithfully."52
and
attend
businesses,buy homes,
college.53But given the reachof the militaryestablishment'santihomosexualapparatus,the down paymentthat these soldiersmade on
here to David R. Roediger'sargument that attaining the status of whiteness
50 There is an interesting parallel
compensates for economic exploitation; avoiding the stigma of homosexuality seemed more important than collecting the materialbenefits of the G.I. Bill (at least to policy makers).Thanks to Kevin Murphy for pointing this
out. David R. Roediger, The Wagesof Whiteness:Race and the Making of the American WorkingClass (London,
1999).
51 Timemagazineobservedin 1950 that veteransand their families constituted nearlyhalf the nation'spopulation. Bennett, WhenDreams Came True,ix. And Theda Skocpol and others have describedveterans'benefits as a
cornerstoneof the Americanwelfarestate. Amenta and Skocpol, "Redefiningthe New Deal," 94. Marshall,"Citizenship and Social Class,"93.
52See B&rube,Coming Out underFire, 245. Robert Schott to Forrestal,July 16, 1946, box 15, World War II
ProjectRecords;Norman T. Kirk to Assistantto the Secretaryof War,July 20, 1946, box 17, ibid.
53All of which may have furtheredthe development of urban subculturesthat were a precondition for the gay
rights movement. See D'Emilio, SexualPolitics,Sexual Communities.For the argument that the gay rights movement was in part motivated by the unfair treatmentof gay and lesbian soldiers in the military and under the G.I.
Bill and that "the campaign against blue discharges,introduced the concepts of 'rights,''injustice,'and 'discrimination' to public discussions of homosexuality,"see Bdrube,ComingOut underFire, 249, 253.
This content downloaded from 74.10.198.56 on Tue, 3 Dec 2013 14:21:45 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
956
TheJournal
ofAmerican
History
December
2003
theirG.I. Billentitlements
wasremaininghiddenwhilein the service.Forsuchindividuals,the state'sallocationof veterans'benefitsmayhavebeeninternallyfragmentcentralelements
ing-providing possibilitiesfora betterlife evenwhilestigmatizing
of it.54
In essence,the militaryestablishment
usedthe G.I. Bill to builda closetwithin
federalsocialpolicy.The closetdependedupon the visibleexclusionof certainsoldiersbelievedto haveengagedin homosexualactsor to possesshomosexualtendencies. The closet simultaneouslyallowedfor the inclusionof many soldierswho
experienced
homosexuality
duringWorldWarII. Butthe invisibilityof thosesoldiers
was criticalbecauseit enabledmilitaryandvA officialsto pretendthathomosexual
soldiershadnot defendedtheircountry,thattheycouldnot meetthe obligationsof
good citizens.This sleightof handin turnhighlightedthe masculinismof the citizen-soldier."Waris not a pettingparty,"remarkedone congressman
duringdebate
on the G.I. Bill,"itis not a powderpuffaffair."55
Such masculinismalso helped concealanothertype of soldier-women-and
ensuredthatwomen'scontributions
to the wareffortwouldalsobe minimized.This
madeit moredifficultforwomenveteransto claimtheirbenefitsas rightstheyhad
earnedand reinforcedlawmakers
in upholdingthe genderinequitiesthathad been
writteninto the G.I. Billlegislation.The G.I. Billofferedthe mostgenerousbenefits
to marriedmen-shoring up theirpositionas familyprovidersthroughdependency
allowancesand survivors'benefits.56Women'sbenefits-particularlyallowances
grantedto carefor dependents-wereinferiorto men'sto beginwith, and women
veteransalso facedhostilityfrom the veterans'organizations
that helpedso many
maleveteransobtaintheirG.I. Bill benefits.57
Mostcritically,the factthatthe miliin the militaryat 2 percentof the totalforce(until
tarycappedwomen'sparticipation
54In one "ArmedForcesTalk"distributed to unit commanders,soldiers were warned that homosexuality and
sexual perversionwere grounds for an undesirabledischargeand that "eligibilityfor veterans'preferencein Federal
employment, for payments for service-connecteddisability,for a pension, and for many other benefits and privileges ... will depend upon the type of dischargeyou receive."Armed ForcesTalk 288, file 211, box 36, AGO's
Legislativeand Policy PrecedentFiles, Recordsof the Adjutant General'sOffice.
55On masculinism,defined as "thosefeaturesof the state that signify, enact, sustain, and representmasculine
power as a form of dominance,"see Wendy Brown, StatesofInjury:Powerand Freedomin LateModernity(Princeton, 1995), 167. Committee on World War Veterans'Legislation,Hearingson H.R. 3917 and S. 1767, 203. The
speakerwas chairmanJohn Rankin.
56Women'sservicewas renderedinvisible by devaluingwomen'sactual military service as well as their work in
war industries. On the G.I. Bill's selective generosity,see Cohen, Consumers'
Republic,137-39; and June A. WilAmerica'sForgottenHeroines(New York, 1983), 169. Legislatorsintended that widows of
lenz, WomenVeterans:
deceased male veteransreceivetheir husbands'benefits (and the use of dead or disabledhusbands'veterans'preference points) as derivativefrom the men who had "earned"them, ratherthan as women's own entitlements. Ritter,
"Of War and Virtue,"223. "The G.I. Bill dispensed privilegesto as much as one quarterof the population... and
at the same time confirmed the rightnessof a family model in which the male head was the most secure and best
skilled providerin the household,"accordingto Cott, Public Vows,191.
7 The "assumptionthat women were economic dependents not supporters"undermined benefits for women
veterans,accordingto Hartmann, Home Frontand Beyond,44. Women veteranscould not collect unemployment
benefits until they demonstratedthat they were not receivingsupport from a male wage earner.Male dependency
distressedlegislators;hence women veteransattending college collected smallerallowancesfor dependent spouses
than did male veterans. Cohen, Consumers'
Republic,138. Similarly,unremarriedwidows, but not widowers, of
veteranswere eligible for G.I. loans for homes, farms, and businesses.Benefits for dependents of women veterans
were equalizedin 1972. Willenz, WomenVeterans,169, 193. On discriminationagainstwomen in benefits' counseling by veterans'organizations,see Cohen, Consumers'
Republic,138.
This content downloaded from 74.10.198.56 on Tue, 3 Dec 2013 14:21:45 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
SexualityandSocialCitizenshipunderthe G.I. Bill
957
women'soverallaccessto the G.I. Bill, automatically
1967) circumscribed
directing
98 percent of state resourcesallocatedfor veteranstoward men. All of this ensured
that most women would experiencethe expansionof social citizenshipthroughtheir
husbands'benefits.58
The G.I. Billdid morethanjustcreatea closet,then.It alsoinstitutionalized
hetresources
to
men
so
that-at
a
moment
when
women
had
erosexuality
by channeling
made significantgainsin the workplace-the economicincentivesfor women to
in federal
of heterosexuality
marryremainedfirmlyin place.The institutionalization
a
that
the
state
to
was
economic
policy
two-partprocess required
provide
supportfor
male
while
it
breadwinners)
marriage(through
stigmatizedhomosexuality.Still,
wives might collectbenefits,and so might numeroussoldierswho had expressed
homosexualdesireduringthe war.Butthe shakinessof theirclaimsonlyhighlighted
the dignifiedandeasyaccessto benefitsthatthe prototypical
heterosexual
malecitizen-soldierenjoyed.How the G.I. Bill excluded
certainsoldiersfromthe benefitsof
socialcitizenshipmustbe understood,then, in tandemwith how it includedthem;
that inclusionnot only shoredup maleandheterosexual
privilegebut alsosimultaneouslyreliedon thosewho differedfromthe normativeto revealthe mostdeserving
strataof the citizenry.59
58New YorkTimes,July 26, 1946, p. 18; Kerber,No ConstitutionalRight to Be Ladies,227. "The G.I. Bill ...
increasedthe gap between men and women in opportunities and status,"accordingto Hartmann, Home Frontand
Beyond,26. Not all women who servedin the militaryduringWorld War II were eligible for G.I. Bill benefits. Not
until 1980 were women who served in the Women'sAuxiliaryArmy Corps (the predecessorto the WAC)and the
the air force equivalent of the WAc)awardedveterans'benefits. Willenz,
Women'sAirforce Service Pilots (WASPs,
WomenVeterans,169. Women were also incorporatedinto Social Security-the other major component of social
citizenship-primarily through their husbands'benefits. See Kessler-Harris,In PursuitofEquity,chap. 3.
59 On the history of state economic support for marriage,see Cott, Public Vows;Kessler-Harris,In Pursuitof
Equity;and Peggy Pascoe, "Race, Gender, and the Privilegesof Property:On the Significance of Miscegenation
Law,"in Overthe Edge:RemappingtheAmericanWest,ed. ValerieJ. Matsumoto and BlakeAllmendinger (Berkeley,
1999), 215-30. Implementation of the G.I. Bill also reinforced the whiteness of the normative citizen. Many
black soldiers receiveddishonorableor undesirabledischarges,making them ineligible for the G.I. Bill. But even
black soldiers who were eligible experienced difficulty collecting their benefits: veterans' organizations denied
them membership;those who approachedthe VAfor help sometimes faced hostility; white colleges refusedthem
admission; housing loans were often useless for them because the VArequiredveteransto qualify at privatebanks,
167-73. For the argument
many of which refusedto qualify black veteransfor loans. Cohen, Consumers'Republic,
that the G.I. Bill was of limited use to black veterans in the South because of racial discrimination and poor
administration,see Onkst, "'Firsta Negro ... Incidentallya Veteran."'
This content downloaded from 74.10.198.56 on Tue, 3 Dec 2013 14:21:45 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions