Somehow, the concept that heterosexuals fear openly serving homosexuals as some sort of threat to their professional competitiveness, is specious. Are you suggesting that homosexuals in the military somehow truncate their professional superiority because they are homosexuals? Exactly how would that work? What does advertising or disclosing one’s sexuality have to do with advancement based on better performance than their heterosexual peers? Remaining “in the closet” has no bearing on performance.
As to the absolutely specious comparison of skin color and homosexuality, General Powell, before he became a Democrat sycophant, testifying before congress, summmed it up susccinctly. Skin color is genetic; sexual proclivity is a choice.
That was Powell’s opinion. The last time I looked, General Powell was not a geneticist, actually he wasn’t much of a diplomat either but we gave him over-arching authority in that department as well.
Astute gays, and I’d venture that some of the most astute gays are in the military, know what wealthy business people in the United States know...it’s ok to be moderately successful, but being wildly successful in America draws a great deal of attention to you and can end with you being handed your head. Whether its the IRS or the UCMJ that delivers the head, the effect is still the same.
So, yes, it is plausible that gays in the military meter out their exemplary efforts to maintain moderate success for fear of drawing too much attention...I’d stand by that as a possible theory.