military performance in any way.273 Since Canada lifted its ban, for example, no evidence has been found that the presence of gays and lesbians has had any appreciable effect on any aspect of military life or performance (see Box 14.2). 274 Box 14.2 The Lifting of the Ban on Gays in Canadian Military Has No Impact on Unit Cohesion274 Canadian Defence officials knew to date of no instances of people acknowledging or talking about their homosexual relationships, no fights or violent incidents, no resignations (despite previous threats to quit), no problems with recruitment, and no diminution of cohesion, morale, or organizational effectiveness. Cultural attitudes as a core issue of non-acceptance of gays and lesbians The main arguments against admitting gays and lesbians to the armed forces are not based on scientific proof or objective evidence but on cultural grounds and prejudices. Concerns do exist that a homophobic mentality prevails in the armed forces, whereby anyone who is different or does not fit in may face hurdles.275 Cultural barriers are a problem not only in countries where gays and lesbians are still prohibited from serving, but also in countries where the ban has been lifted. In the latter countries, gays and lesbians still encounter significant resistance from within the military even when the top military leadership speaks out against homophobic practices at work. Thus, some OSCE participating States have taken measures to guarantee not only de jure equality but also to promote de facto equality (see Section 4 of this chapter, “Policies and Mechanisms for Promoting Equality”). Harassment and discrimination Even though the legal position of gays and lesbians has improved in recent years, gay and lesbian personnel still face various forms of discrimination. Typical forms of discrimination include unofficial policies or practices that may impact on future career advancement.276 Other forms of discrimination include unequal treatment as far as housing and other domestic benefits to same-sex partners are concerned. Furthermore, gay and lesbian service members are often obliged to work in a hostile environment and are sometimes subject to abuse and harassment due to their sexual orientation. Such harassment ranges from offensive speech, jokes, and name-calling, to sexual violence and violent assaults. A study recently conducted in the United States indicates that nearly 39 per cent of 71,455 military respondents reported being aware of incidents of harassment based on perceptions of an individual’s sexual orientation during the preceding 12 months. Of those claiming awareness, the largest proportion reported awareness of only one incident (14.6 per cent), while 1.6 per cent reported being aware of more than one incident.277 273  A. Belkin, “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell: Is the Gay Ban Based on Military Necessity?”, Parameters, Summer 2003, pp. 108-119, available at <http://www.gaymilitary.ucsb.edu/Publications/2003_BelkinInParameters.pdf>. 274  Bernard Rostker et al., Sexual Orientation and U.S. Military Personnel Policy: Options and Assessment (Santa Monica, California: RAND Corporation, 1993), pp. 74-79. 275  Finding based on opinions of experts, ODIHR-DCAF Human Rights of Armed Forces Review Workshop, Warsaw, December 2006. 276  M. Wechsler Segal, “Sexuality and the Military, Armed Forces and International Security: Global Trends and Issues”, in Jean Callaghan and Franz Kernic (eds.), Armed Forces and International Security: Global Trends and Issues (Piscataway, New Jersey: Transaction Publishers, 2003), pp. 217-220. 277  K. Bowling, J. Firestone, R. Harris, “Analyzing Questions That Cannot Be Asked of Respondents Who Cannot Respond”, Armed Forces & Society, Vol. 31, No. 3, Spring 2005, p. 432, available at <http://afs.sagepub. com/cgi/reprint/31/3/411>. 131 Handbook on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms of Armed Forces Personnel