Interview with Top Gun Pilot Tracy Thorne by Garland Tillery May 18, 1993 (Note: This interview was conducted for "Our Own Community Press", one of the country's oldest gay newspapers, based in Norfolk, Virginia. The huge concentration of military bases in Norfolk and Virginia Beach have made the area a focal point for activism in rescinding the military ban of gays. Leonard Matlovich, Vernon "Copy" Berg, Karen Stupski, and now Tracy Thorne have all been local residents who began their legal actions here. The day follow- ing this interview, Thorne was placed on inactive duty status and moved to Washington, DC a week later.) What is your current military status? -The attorney general has suspended my discharge from the service at this point, and I will be separated from active duty tomorrow afternoon meaning that I will be placed in the standby reserve pending a final resolution of the President's action with overturning the ban. If he is successful at completely overturning the ban I imagine that I will be allowed to return to active duty at that time. If he is unsuccessful or is only able to get some kind of compromise, I imagine that at that time I will be completely discharged from the service. But, regardless of the wording that is being used, I don't like people saying that my discharge has been suspended, regardless of whether or not that's what the attorney general says. I am going to be discharged from active duty tomorrow. I am going to be out of a job. I'm going to be out of a paycheck and looking for a way basically to pay my rent. Are you discouraged? -No, I'm not going to say I'm discouraged. I'll say that I'm frustrated at what's going on. But at the same time when I was sitting in the Senate hearings the other day up in Washington in the Hart Senate building, I really had to sock myself in the head and think, here we are actually talking about it. Ten years ago you couldn't get people to say the word and now we are actually talking about homosexuals in the military. I mean, we have come a long way. But by the very virtue that we are talking about this we are winning because every time that someone learns the truth about what is going on, every time that someone sees the discrimination that is out there and every time that someone just gets up there and tells their story, that is all that matters. Just talking about it is enough. Once it is talked about enough. Once people come out of the closet personally themselves then we will win on our own merits without even having to argue. So all that certainly is encouraging to me, but I am very discouraged in seeing all the hang-ups and the frustration that comes with seeing people get all wrapped around the axle over superfluous technicalities. What kind of technicalities? -It drives me crazy that we see pictures on the front page of the paper and magazines of Sam Nunn and Senator Warner bending down and looking into a rack wondering if it is big enough for a homosexual. Well excuse me Senator, but homosexuals are already there. We acknowledge that, you acknowledge that. Three years ago they wouldn't even acknowledge that there gays in the military. Now at least we have gotten them doing that. But the whole issue of looking at spaces on ships is absolutely ludicrous. It ignores the fact that gays are already there. What is the difference between suspecting and knowing someone is gay in a sailor's eyes? -Absolutely nothing. To me, I think that I would rather know than suspect. If you suspect, you are constantly worrying about what to do around a person. If you know and aren't paranoid, at least you know that the person is gay and you know not to put yourself into a position where you are going to feel incredibly uncomfortable. I think that suspicion is the worst case. But Lt. Selland is the one who can tell you that the situation is fine until your commanding officer goes out and starts a witch hunt and starts dragging people in and investigating them. That's when people start looking over their shoulder. That's when he said that morale on his ship went to hell. You came out to your CO on the same day that you went on Nightline, right? -Yes. I did it as a courtesy to him. I didn't want him to be blindsided by this. I felt that I owed him the respect of telling him what was going to happen. I wasn't telling him for the benefit of knowing that I was gay. I was telling him that I was going to be coming out in a national stance. Do you think that his response would have been different if you had gone to him privately and just said "I am gay"? Do you think that he would have pursued discharge? -Yes. As a matter of fact, had I thought that he would have not pursued discharge, I would have come out to him in that way. I never wanted to come out in a public way if I felt that I could stay in the Navy. All I wanted to do was be honest with my peers, be honest with my commanding officer and stop the wives club from trying to set me up every weekend. I was tired of having to lie about what I was doing, who I was with. I was tired of being the only single guy in the squadron that was always being set up with people. And that's not the primary thing. The primary reason is to be honest. They think that I am shoving it into their face. As I tried to point out so strongly to anybody who was listening last Monday, is it shoving it in your face when you come in wearing a wedding ring? is it shoving it in your face when you come in and have a picture of your wife on your desk? is it shoving it in your face when you come in and talk about your family on Monday after a great weekend? That's all I'm asking for...just to live my life like any other person. Heterosexuals forget that in the workplace, there is a presumption of heterosexuality. They just don't get it! What's going to make them get it? -People coming out who they know. That's the only way that this battle will ever be won. And yet, we have Colonel Peck and his son... -Peck's mind will be changed. I think that in 30 days he will regret what he did. Here we have a guy who just found out that his son was gay three or four days prior. He is an intelligent man. He seems like a very kind person. I think that he will regret what he said. If the policy is overturned, do you intend on returning to full status? -Oh yeah. If the Navy is changed, I want back in. If the policy is changed to treat me just like anybody else, then I am going back in as soon as the Navy will allow me to. But if the policy is changed to some kind of compromise where I am treated as a second class citizen, then I don't want any part of it. I don't think that government has any place regulating people's private lives. I don't think that the government should be telling people, as they do in the state of Virginia, what position they need to have sex in. I really don't think that is appropriate for the government. If you want to legislate morality, well you can move to another country where they don't have separation of church and state. I think morality can exist without being religiously based. As far as the UCMJ (Uniform Code of Military Justice) goes, I think that they should get rid of the sodomy laws. And if they don't, I'm going to have a serious problem going back into a military that prohibits people from engaging in private, consensual adult sex. What if the laws were overlooked? -I really don't know. It's all hypothetical now. I would really have to sit back and see how the military deals with it. I don't want to go back in and be prosecuted for something that has nothing to do with my job or my performance. I would have to see how the military reacts to changes in the UCMJ. But I don't think that they are even going to touch the UCMJ. It would take an act of Congress to do it and Congress is not willing to move on it. Congress has just shown a great deal of hostility towards changing the UCMJ. My god, we still have sodomy laws in half the states. Do you think that Nunn's proposal of maintaining the status quo would go to the Supreme Court? -Yes. I think that the Supreme Court would uphold the previous policy of excluding gays, but they are not going to uphold something like this...something that blatantly says "We know you are there but we are going to ignore your existence and we are going to treat you like second-class citizens. So don't tell us the truth because we don't want to know it." Sam Nunn has really sound-bited this thing well. He has thrown out the idea of "What's wrong with asking people, both straight and gay to keep their private lives private?" Sounds great. Americans are eating it up. Especially seeing all the scandals that we have had around conduct in the military over the last few years. But Nunn doesn't recognize that nobody keeps their private lives private to the extent that he wants. Wearing a wedding ring, or talking about your family, or having a picture of your girlfriend or wife on your desk...that's not keeping your private life private. All we are asking for is to be able to do the same thing. Nothing more, nothing less. What are Sam Nunn's motives? -Sam Nunn doesn't want homosexuals in the Navy, period. He doesn't think that they should have equal rights, and he is going to do everything he can on this issue to stop it. He has politically masterminded these hearings. Like I was quoted in "Time" today, "It's Nunn's Dog and Pony Show!" And that's what it is. He has hand picked every witness who has testified. I have had at least a dozen soldiers and sailors call me up and say "I called the Senate Armed Services Committee and told them that I was a straight sailor or a straight officer who wanted to testify on behalf of lifting the ban on gays in the military and was told that I was not needed." Well when I looked on my left when I sat down at that table before the hearings I had two empty chairs on my left and two empty chairs on my right. There was plenty of room for somebody else to be there and they were not asked. I mean he has rigged these hearings and run them in such a one- sided way that they can be seen as nothing but Sam Nunn's Dog and Pony Show. Nunn doesn't want this out of his hands. He's trying to run for President in 1996. What about the House hearings? -The House hearings has been a little more in our favor. Congressman Dellums has been doing certainly a much more favorable job. Have you been requested to testify at those hearings? -No. I haven't followed them very much at all. Were you at the hearing in DC the day after your Norfolk hearing? -Yes.That was interesting. I thought that it was entirely one-sided. I think that the gay witnesses did a fantastic job, but calling in the media superstars...General Schwartzkopf and Col. Peck who had been in everybody's living room for the last six months, to me just showed how far Sen. Nunn was going on this. Tonight you received a call from associates of Barney Frank. Can you tell us what was said? -I heard that Barney Frank had offered another compromise today. It would basically be "Don't ask, don't scream." It would have codes of conduct set up separately for gays that would be different from codes of conduct set up for heterosexuals, that gays will be told to keep their life off-base and that they are not to talk about it, and if they do, then it will be up to the Commanding Officer whether or not to proceed on a discharge. And if anybody is found out, then the Commanding Officer will not be able to discharge people simply because they say they are gay or are found out, but will have the option to handle it at his own discretion. I still think that is unacceptable. Have you met with the President's friend, David Mixner? -Yes, he is a close friend. David is very committed to ending any kind of discrimination and to him, anything that falls short of a complete and total executive order ending discrimination against gays and lesbians in the military in any fashion will be unacceptable. I am fairly confident that I represent his views accurately there. In other words, either of the compromises that have been spoken of here will be unacceptable to him. It seems like Mixner has been motivated to become an activist because of the death of his lover from AIDS. How important do you think AIDS has been to gay activism in general? -Since I have lived the majority of my life incredibly closeted and have been completely ignorant of HIV and AIDS, I am just laying out the way things appear to me. I think that it has done enormous good for the gay community only in that it has brought us together, politically mobilized us and forced us to get off our asses and fight for our rights. But you don't know exactly how he feels (Mixner) at this moment? -We talked about it a week ago. He thinks that we can pull off a vote in the Senate. The problem is keeping this thing from going to a vote with a compromise, the problem is keeping the President from being forced into a corner on this. He thinks that the President can run through the full executive order. The problem centers around whether the President is going to risk that. Whether he will risk a defeat by asking for the whole ball of wax or whether he is going to issue an executive order similar to one of the compromises we've talked about tonight. David thinks that either way he can handle the vote in the Senate, and if he wins in the Senate, the House won't touch it. Does Mixner still have the President's ear? -I don't know. He doesn't know. He hasn't spoken with him since the President announced his consideration of segregation. Do you see Mixner as a gay leader? -Absolutely. The problem is that our community is so incredibly diverse, and he is seen as someone who has been part of the establishment. Because of that it is a liability for him. I don't think that it should be because he is a fantastic human being who has enormous potential. I mean, he could be our Martin Luther King, no questions asked. Do we need a Martin Luther King? -Yes, we do. We need a spokesperson. Someone we can come behind. I think that David Mixner is that person. But because of the fact that he is seen as someone who has been involved with the establishment, because of the fact that he is a white man, he is not enough of a special interest group to satisfy a large vocal part of the gay community. What kind of person is right to satisfy everyone? -There isn't one. I think that Mixner is the closest we have ever seen. I also think that Urvashi Vaid is a great leader and I deeply respect her, but she is not part of the establishment, and she is not a white man, so she can't appeal to another large chunk of the community, even though she is a great leader...fantastic. I think that they are two of the most powerful people I have ever heard speak. Is there a place for a military person who is a very effective speaker with an outstanding record to be a gay leader? -I think that the closest person who ever came to that was Leonard Matlovich and he was cast aside in a heart beat because he was a military man, because he was seen as someone with conservative views. The poor guy gave everything, including his life, to the gay community and was completely cast aside. He was eaten by the gay community. Here was someone who sacrificed his career with the best of intentions, and until the very last day always expected that he could get back into the Air Force. Did the gay community take him and offer him a job? Did they give him a place to live? Did they offer him anything? No. This guy lived on scraps for a long time. He even went to San Francisco and ran for political office and lost overwhelmingly because he was seen as too conservative. Where do you find yourself in the spectrum of gay leaders? -I just see myself as a stepping stone on the way to change. All I ever wanted to do was my part, just help chip away at this thick wall of discrimination as I have described it before. When enough people get up and chip away a little piece, it is eventually going to come tumbling down. I think that I have done my part. I'm not saying that I want to quit. I just want to live my life. I want to go back to school and get an education that will maybe better enable me to fight this in the future. And then I can come back and even do more good. Along the way I'm still going to speak out when I think that I can be of help. Like I was telling Tom Panacia, I am not going to become an avowed homosexual activist. I want to go back and do something besides being a professional homosexual. Your job was very important to you? -Oh yeah. I will certainly miss it. I've been out of a plane for a year. How has your dad dealt with this? -He has been very supportive. At first he had a really hard time. I only came out to him four days before I came out on Nightline and so it hit him real hard. We did not talk for two months. But shortly before my board of inquiry he came up and delivered the most beautiful, supportive testimony in support of me to the board. As a matter of fact it was published in Harper's Magazine. It was really fantastic. Again, my dad doesn't want me to get wrapped around this for the rest of my life. I agree. I am willing to do my part and I'm willing to come back to this in the future. I'm not completely ruling it out. I'm just saying that I'm not going to allow myself to get wrapped up in this and to be living off food stamps or whatever. It has been really rough for Karen Stupski. -Yeah. I look out there and I don't see anybody who has come out of this well. They are out there, but it is tough to get into that position from the outside. It is also tough without a good education. They all have masters or law degrees. So that is what I am going to get! What have been the high points since May 19th, 1992 when you were on Nightline? -Having my dad come up, having my family with me at the board of inquiry. Going to pride events over the last year. The inauguration. Meeting my boyfriend was the highest point, I guess. Tell us about him. -I don't want to go into him that much. I kinda want to keep my private life private. Suffice it to say that we have known each other for a long time but we only started dating over the last eight months. He was in ROTC but dropped out because he is gay. He wasn't forced out. His father is a retired light colonel from the Army and they are very supportive of me as they are of their son. I say that is probably one of the most amazing things about this is how nice it is having supportive parents on both sides. Knowing that we can go home to either family and be ourselves. He doesn't have to call me a friend. "This is my friend." What were the low points? -Getting recommended for a honorable discharge by the board of inquiry. So the board of inquiry is also a low point. Has it ever seemed like it was not worth it? -No, never. Did you ever wonder if you were the right person to be doing this? -No. I really see myself as just an Average Joe. I think that is all the statement that needs to be made, that Average Joe's can be gay. So in that sense, I felt that I was the right person to do what I did. I think that there are better people to do it. I can't really think of anybody particular, but there are better people that could do it. So you don't find yourself to be exceptional? -No. Just an Average Joe. Have you met a whole lot of Average Joes since then? -Lots. Lots of them who's lives have been screwed up a lot more than mine has. See I am in a unique position. I'm in a place where my family is supportive of me and can take care of me. My dad will send me back to school if and when I decide to go. My life is not going to be ruined by this. I can look at a lot of people out there who don't have a chance to go back to school, or who, since they got out with a less-than-honorable discharge and they didn't have the media around them like I did, they won't even have their Montgomery GI bill. So, I see myself really lucky to be in the position that I was in . There are a lot of other guys, plain ole Average-Joes, great people, who didn't know how to handle the defense, didn't know how to handle the NIS, or who said the wrong things, or were just screwed by the system. What does image mean to the gay movement? -Image is everything, as long as it is the truth. Have the images we have been having recently been sufficiently positive? Have there been negative images that have damaging to us recently? -Of course, the videotape "The Gay Agenda" has been very damaging. Where did they come up with that? -I heard they got it from the pride parades of San Francisco, ancient pride parades around 1970 or so. I think that those images can be very damaging. But it is like Mixner has said, he wants to make a movie called "The Heterosexual Agenda" and go to football games and get pictures with people with big, ole floppy ears on their heads and their faces painted up, and go to Mardi Gras and take pictures of them marching around. That would be just as degrading and insulting. That is not how people live their lives. We go home, put on our pants one leg at a time just like anybody else and go to work and live perfectly normal lives just like anybody else. But if you ever took a picture of somebody having a good time or celebrating, you could make a tape called "The Something Agenda." Image is everything as long as it is the truth. I really don't think that there are that many people out there who believe that "The Gay Agenda" is the truth. How about when they hear that juxtaposed with a picture of picture of Perry Watkins in uniform at the March with a nose ring? -I think that if Perry wants to wear a nose ring, that is fine. I don't think that it is appropriate when he is wearing his uniform. I think that is an insult to the US Army, an insult to the country. Those are really strong words, but I think that there are some really important points at work that we need to make here. The fact is that we are asking to be treated just like anybody else. Nobody else is asking to ask nose rings with their uniform. They don't even allow us to wear earrings with our uniform. So nose rings are certainly inappropriate. Was image discussed with all of you before the march? -No, I think that it was more of a concern. Everybody was concerned about the image. But there is no gay leader, as we have already talked about. If anybody got up there on the podium and tried to tell people how to behave, they would have been shot. This community is too diverse, it is too outspoken and too controversial to take anything like that. I think that the image we saw at the March, aside from some of the speakers on the podium, was very positive. Nine out of ten people there were average Joes and average Janes. What about the speaker who wanted to get it on with Hillary Clinton? -I thought that it was incredibly insulting. I also thought that a number of speakers up there, were there because they were special interest groups. I kinda felt like unless I was a handicapped Lesbian of color that I was out of place. And I was beginning to feel as a white male that I didn't have any place there. This is getting way more into politics than I wanted, but the whole march committee there was very special interest tied. And what has been the biggest issue this year in gay rights? Almost the biggest issue in the country has been gays in the military. Not a single member of the Armed Forces was allowed to address the crowd. Not a single one. And it was a big deal, believe me, that they let Gary Studds, Barney Frank and David Mixner talk. It was a big deal. There was no reason that whatsoever that Gretta Cammemeyer should not have addressed that crowd. She should have been out there. She is the senior member of the Armed Forces who is fighting this issue, and she is a very good spokeswoman, and she should have been out there. And she was not asked. You seem to think that Norfolk-Virginia Beach is very conservative. Have you ever seen such a conservative attitude anyplace else? -No. God, this is the most conservative place I have ever lived. I lived in Nashville, Tennessee, and it was much more liberal than this. This town is so incredibly polarized. That's why I don't do local media. What good does it do for me to get on channel 13 or channel 10 and talk. I'm not going to change anybodies mind in this town. All I am doing is making life more difficult for me, so that's why you don't see me on local media very much. Do you have any problems going out in restaurants or being seen publicly? -People recognize me everywhere I go. I have yet to have anybody come up to me and say "I think that you are a real jerk" or "I think that you faggots should die" or "I think that you are really doing your country a disservice." People come up to me all the time and say "I want to thank you for what you are doing." "I support you 100%." "Keep up the good work." I have that happen all the time. In that sense, the city has been very supportive of me. Especially the gay community. "Our Own" has been very supportive. It was "Our Own" that put me in touch with the gay community. When I was totally in the closet it was my only way of finding out what was going on. Joe Steffan and Copy Berg have both written books. Have you thought about that? -Yeah. I have thought of it lots. I don't think that I will write a book. I will write one under the following conditions: if there is a need to educate the public and I can fulfill that need. I will not write a book if it is a book about Tracy Thorne and it is a book telling them about me. If I can tell them what it is like being gay in a gay bashing world, if I can tell them what it is like being in the armed forces as a gay man and by doing that I can help change things, then I would do it. But I don't want to write about Tracy Thorne; I don't want to promote my name; I don't want to make money off my story. And another issue besides a book, I have had to consider whether or not I want to do any public speaking after this in order to support myself, because there are agencies out there that can bring in a good bit of money for me to go out public speaking, and I have had a really hard time wrestling with whether I want to make money off this issue. I am proud to say that I am the only one who doesn't have a book contract. I don't have a book contract, I don't have a movie contract. And I don't want them. I am proud to say that. I'm not saying that I look unfavorably at Joe or Gretta or Tom Panacia or any of them, or Tanya Domi. I'm just saying that's not for me. I don't want this to look like I'm slinging mud on them because I'm not. I'm just saying that is not for me. And if I go out public speaking, it's going to be to survive, or if I can help educate the public about this issue. It is definitely something that I have a hard time grappling with, is whether I want to do public speaking or if I even want to consider doing a book in the future. And I use little words, too. You've got to have a big vocabulary to write a book. Was there anything that you wanted to say to Senator Thurmond when he asked if you had sought psychiatric help to become heterosexual? -I wanted to tell him that some people don't think that it is normal for 90 year old men to marry 35 year old women, but he decided to do it. I'm not going to judge him on that. He sure as hell shouldn't judge me on what I do. Why didn't you do it? -Because it didn't pop into my mind immediately. Would you have done it? -Yes. People would say that was not appropriate. Well it's not appropriate for him to be ruining my life and the lives of others. I would have said it in a heartbeat if it had popped into my mind right away. I was actually surprised at how docile his questions were because he had been absolutely ludicrous on the Senate floor on this issue. Maybe to the extent that his staff thought he was getting out of control and was starting to do public relations damage to himself. So he behaved himself, I think. But I wasn't intimidated by him because the man had nothing but a script in front of him which was prepared for him by his staff. He is incapable of performing on his own at this point and reads all of his questions. Who did you take guidance from prior to Nightline? -Karen (Stupski). Was she the only person? -No. Karen put me in touch with some other people, but Karen Stupski was the first person I talked with and she was very, very helpful. How did you find Karen? -Randy Shilts gave me her name. I called Karen and asked me to come up to Washington and meet with her and several members of the GLBVA, so I met with them. Was that when you met Tanya Domi? -Yes, and Allen Stevens. Tanya and Allen and Karen and David Vershure, an aide from Congresswoman Schroder's office, the four of them and myself all sat down and started talking. I went up there strictly for one reason. I wanted to know how the hell to protect myself if I decided to come out to my commanding officer, and I went away with the idea of Nightline. How did that idea come to you? -Well they presented it to me. They had been looking for somebody for a long time. I just happened to fit the bill. I was under the impression that Karen was playing the devil's advocate in this. -Oh yeah. They all were. They proposed it to me, but immediately said "Understand what is going to happen here. You are going to be out of the military in three weeks." Was this planned by Schroeder? -No, this was not orchestrated by her or her office. It was orchestrated by four private citizens. How long before the Nightline interview did you begin thinking about coming out to your CO? -It was probably about March. I did the interview in May, so it was probably late March. What was the catalyst? -A lot had been getting under my skin for awhile, dealing with my squadron, always trying to set me up with women. I had just gone out to Colorado and was staying with my sister skiing and that weekend I saw "Doing Time on Maple Drive." It was a fantastic movie about a college student coming home and coming out to his family. It was just really very well done. That was the best movie that I have ever seen dealing with gays. Just really, really positive. I saw that and the next day came out to my sister, and the next day I flew back here, and on the way home I sat and thought the whole way about coming out. No questions asked, I was going to come out to my squadron, one way or the other. So a few weeks passed and I got in touch with Karen and she said to come up to DC. That was in April. They said that this Nightline thing would probably be in six months, so for me to go home and think about it, you have a long time. They called me back a week later and said "Can you do it next week?" Schroeder wasn't supposed to introduce her bill until November, but she went ahead and did it. I said "Oh well. I guess things are going to go a little faster than I had thought." You've been quoted as saying that you had pretty good support from members of your squadron. Is that still true? -No, but my close friends in the squad are still very supportive of me. Did any of them speak to you about why they were not publicly supportive of you? -Some did. And they lost their career. One bombardier lost his career because of it. To him, it wasn't that big a deal because he wasn't planning on staying in anyway, but he read about it in his fitness reports. His fitness reports took a nose-dive because of his support for me, effectively ruining any chance for promotion to Lt. Cmdr. And he is getting out of the Navy now. But it worked out in the long run for him. He got into UVA law school and a large portion of the reason he got into law school was because he mentioned to the dean of admissions that he had testified at my board of inquiry and the Dean of Admissions said "Oh, you know Tracy Thorne? We follow his case all the time. They spent the next hour talking about it. Before he walked out, the Dean was patting him on the back and saying "Well, we're going to do whatever we can to get you in this school. So it ended one career for him but maybe it opened another one for him. What kind of things did you do as a youngster in high school? -I was having too much fun to even worry about sexuality. I was very involved in athletics, student government, ran track and cross country. I was manager of the football team, president of the Key Club, president of the Exchange Club...involved in a number of things, and just real big in having a good time. Going out water skiing, fishing, things like that. Did you date? -Very little. I dated two girls the entire time I was in high school and maybe had 10 dates between the two of them. I wasn't interested. I knew that I was attracted to guys, but I thought that it was just a phase and everybody felt that way and that it would go away shortly. It never did. Did you want it to go away? -Yes! God! When Thurmond was asking if I had gone to a psychiatrist, I said "No, I don't want to change my sexuality. I am proud of it. There is no way that I would change it. But this is the part that got quoted by the Washington Post "Growing up gay in a gay bashing world is something that I would never wish on any child. It is incredibly difficult. And it is something that I wouldn't wish on anybody because our society is so intolerant and tells you that if you are gay, you are bad. And if you are gay you are going to lose your family. And if you are gay, you are going to lose your religion." That's what I said. I wasn't referencing my life because for me it was a non-issue. I really never thought about it until I got into college. Really mostly when I got into the Navy. But when I was going through flight training I was keeping myself so busy that I never really thought about being gay at all. You were in a fraternity at Vanderbilt. Was it rough for you? -Oh God, no. I was so involved in that fraternity that it ate up my life. No one tried to hassle you? -Nobody would dare challenge me. I was the leader, Dammit! Yeah, I dated. I was forced into dating a little sister my freshman year when I was a pledge. I didn't date anybody my sophomore year. My junior year, I dated one or two girls once or twice. I later heard that one of them came wandering out of my bedroom one night in the middle of a party and asked the entire fraternity "Why won't Tracy sleep with me?!" So you are a Kinsey six, exclusively homosexual? -I guess I would label myself that. And then my senior year I dated a girl very seriously and dated her almost two years. During my flight training I said "I can't make this work." I was considering getting married to her, having kids. As far as I was concerned, I was going to live the heterosexual agenda. Were you sexually attracted to her? -No. I could make it work, but it wasn't a full relationship. I felt like I loved her, but it wasn't right, and I knew that it wasn't right. What do you intend on doing after tomorrow when you are placed on standby reserve status? -Well, I am going to be moving out of the area as there's really not much in Virginia Beach to hold my interest. I'm going to be going to Washington and looking for work up there, and basically planning on getting back into school after about a year. What do you plan on studying? -I'm not really sure at this time. I'm either going for a masters in political science or go to law school. Would you do it all again? -In a heartbeat. I would never, never give up what I have done. It has been the most positive experience in my life. I am very happy that I did it. It has been very positive for my family. It has been very positive for me and my friendships. Everything in my life is better off because of it, except for the fact that I am losing a job. Other than that, there is nothing I would do differently. Copyright 1993, Our Own, Inc., 739 Yarmouth St., Norfolk, VA 23510 (804) 625-0700, fax (804) 625-6024. For more information, contact Garland Tillery @ (804) 481-0396 or e-mail tillery@wyvern.com.