Jump to content

Trump won't allow transgender people to enroll in the military


Go Skins

Recommended Posts

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2017/07/26/trump-announces-ban-on-transgender-people-in-u-s-military/?utm_term=.ab7e59b84681

 

In tweets Wednesday morning the president wrote: “After consultation with my Generals and military experts, please be advised that the United States Government will not accept or allow Transgender individuals to serve in any capacity in the U.S. Military. Our military must be focused on decisive and overwhelming victory and cannot be burdened with the tremendous medical costs and disruption that transgender in the military would entail. Thank you”

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, MichaelWeston said:

You can take out transgender and add in black and then we are in a time machine. 

 

It might make some sense not to pay for gender re-assignment surgery, but to not let them serve is so ridiculous. 

 

The costs of Gender re-assignment surgery are minimal in comparison to the money they spend on Viagra for retirees.

http://www.militarytimes.com/news/2017/07/26/the-military-spends-more-on-giving-retirees-erections-than-on-transgender-troops/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Let me preface this comment with a couple of facts about me and my experiences...

 

I am the parent of two gay children, my son and daughter are joys in my life and that has never changed and I love them unconditionally. My daughters partner is currently transitioning and my wife and I have 4 friends that are either starting their transition, are in the middle of it, and one has completed transitioning.

 

Here's a couple of facts about you might be able to use for information;

 

A person going through transition is mentally unstable, not only because of the mental strife they have been through their entire life, but added to that are the hormones they are taking to transition. After reassignment surgery (which IS an elective surgery) they remain on hormones their entire life. Some can get back to a mentally stable platform, but there are many who cannot. Usually it's the hormones that cause this post surgery.

 

Another fact is that it was quoted about the cost of Viagra versus the cost of gender reassignment surgery.

 

The Viagra that is usually described for retirees is given to those that have a physical ailment, caused by many different things, but mostly due to PTSD. It's not given so that old sailors like me can get hard for four hours and alert the media. Gender reassignment surgery costs are just the tip of the iceberg costs for transitioning. Most places demand that you start therapy at least two years BEFORE starting hormones, then the hormones for a couple of years, then surgery, then post surgery recovery, then intense therapy for an undetermined length of time, followed by hormones for life.

 

Generally, a person transitioning would not be considered "fit for combat duty" for at least a 3 year period. So not only is the military footing the bill, but the person can't do their job for 3 years, and maybe never after that.

 

So the Washington Times story is cherry picking partial facts to fan the flames of argument.

 

As a person who has been in combat, I wouldn't want a transgender/transitioning person with me.  Those that I know who have transitioned or are going through it say they wouldn't want to be in the military.

 

The military is NOT like a civilian job for those that are not aware. We are there to fight and kill basically, put our lives on the line to defend this country.

 

A person who is supposed to be there but can't be due to medical reason, mental reasons, or any other reason weakens us.

 

So before people find yet another reason to blow shit out of proportion, think. The Stay Puft Cheetoh will give numerous fodder to go after, but the transgender issue is weak ass lame bullshit at best.

 

Also, I started serving during the Cold War. I knew that I was serving with gay and lesbian people and I didn't give a rats ass. Most of the people I served with didn't care either, I cared if someone could do the job, period. You can't equate the military job to civilian jobs, as our stakes were much higher. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While your reasoning is sound IMO, I think we both know that's not why he's instituting the ban.  How many people in the military are taking hormones for other reasons? Anti-depressants? How many are alcoholics or using whatever drug the tests might miss? I would bet that any one of those categories is a much higher number than transgender service members currently transitioning.  Veteran suicides are an epidemic, the VA is a disaster, but this is the issue he chooses to focus on?

 

I don't think he's worried about their capability, I think he's trying to shore up his rapidly shrinking base of support by pandering to fundamentalists.  Maybe I'm wrong but dude long since lost the benefit of the doubt AFAIC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, USN Bengal said:

Let me preface this comment with a couple of facts about me and my experiences...

 

I am the parent of two gay children, my son and daughter are joys in my life and that has never changed and I love them unconditionally. My daughters partner is currently transitioning and my wife and I have 4 friends that are either starting their transition, are in the middle of it, and one has completed transitioning.

 

Here's a couple of facts about you might be able to use for information;

 

A person going through transition is mentally unstable, not only because of the mental strife they have been through their entire life, but added to that are the hormones they are taking to transition. After reassignment surgery (which IS an elective surgery) they remain on hormones their entire life. Some can get back to a mentally stable platform, but there are many who cannot. Usually it's the hormones that cause this post surgery.

 

Another fact is that it was quoted about the cost of Viagra versus the cost of gender reassignment surgery.

 

The Viagra that is usually described for retirees is given to those that have a physical ailment, caused by many different things, but mostly due to PTSD. It's not given so that old sailors like me can get hard for four hours and alert the media. Gender reassignment surgery costs are just the tip of the iceberg costs for transitioning. Most places demand that you start therapy at least two years BEFORE starting hormones, then the hormones for a couple of years, then surgery, then post surgery recovery, then intense therapy for an undetermined length of time, followed by hormones for life.

 

Generally, a person transitioning would not be considered "fit for combat duty" for at least a 3 year period. So not only is the military footing the bill, but the person can't do their job for 3 years, and maybe never after that.

 

So the Washington Times story is cherry picking partial facts to fan the flames of argument.

 

As a person who has been in combat, I wouldn't want a transgender/transitioning person with me.  Those that I know who have transitioned or are going through it say they wouldn't want to be in the military.

 

The military is NOT like a civilian job for those that are not aware. We are there to fight and kill basically, put our lives on the line to defend this country.

 

A person who is supposed to be there but can't be due to medical reason, mental reasons, or any other reason weakens us.

 

So before people find yet another reason to blow shit out of proportion, think. The Stay Puft Cheetoh will give numerous fodder to go after, but the transgender issue is weak ass lame bullshit at best.

 

Also, I started serving during the Cold War. I knew that I was serving with gay and lesbian people and I didn't give a rats ass. Most of the people I served with didn't care either, I cared if someone could do the job, period. You can't equate the military job to civilian jobs, as our stakes were much higher. 

 

While I respect your beliefs here I have to ask what makes militaries from other countries that do have transgenders in them different from ours?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No idea honestly... but I would bet that it has to do with the lack of manpower, because if you add up all those countries military personnel together (roughly 840,000), it's just over half of what our military is (roughly 1.6 million).

now I should clarify a couple of things..

 

1. If mental stability could be established for someone transgender but NOT transitioning, I would be in favor of them serving. Even the people we have in the armed services now have to be proven mentally stable (although sometimes I wonder about who is making those judgments).

2. In the end, it's literally about the availability to be there to get yourself possibly killed. I could deal with it, but not in combat situations. Then you would have to understand that if people are in the service and cannot serve in combat situations, they make those that can have to do so longer... while the REMFs (rear echelon mother fuckers) take up the sweet safe spots all the time. Makes for bad juju in the military, believe me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, USN Bengal said:

No idea honestly... but I would bet that it has to do with the lack of manpower, because if you add up all those countries military personnel together (roughly 840,000), it's just over half of what our military is (roughly 1.6 million).

now I should clarify a couple of things..

 

1. If mental stability could be established for someone transgender but NOT transitioning, I would be in favor of them serving. Even the people we have in the armed services now have to be proven mentally stable (although sometimes I wonder about who is making those judgments).

 

 

Out of curiosity, what's that process like? What sort of screening does a recruit go through with MEPS, and what's the procedure for discharging someone if they wake up one morning seeing lizard people?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/18/2017 at 5:34 PM, T-Dub said:

 

Out of curiosity, what's that process like? What sort of screening does a recruit go through with MEPS, and what's the procedure for discharging someone if they wake up one morning seeing lizard people?

LOL! 

 

Generally they ask a battery of questions during during the recruitment process, including MEPS, that are packaged as "the questions to ask" before a recruit is sent to basic training. Where the real mental issues show up is during basic training, because the services break you down, and then build you up in the mold they need you to be.

 

Its a high stress time, and that's where you usually see if someone's bats come flying out of their belfry.

Of course, if you go into battle, issues come forth as well. They try to weed people out prior to battle obviously, and also why the highest stress  is in the Marine Corp , followed by the Army, then Navy, and then Air Force .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Congressman Trey Gowdy's comments on the military (in response to the transgender BS):

Nobody has a "right" to serve in the Military. Nobody.

 

What makes people think the Military is an equal opportunity employer? Very far from it.

 

The Military uses prejudice regularly and consistently to deny citizens from joining for being too old or too young, too fat or too skinny, too tall or too short.

 

Citizens are denied for having flat feet, or for missing or additional fingers. Poor eyesight will disqualify you, as well as bad teeth. Malnourished? Drug addiction? Bad back? Criminal history? Low IQ? Anxiety? Phobias? Hearing damage? Six arms? Hear voices in your head? Self-identify as a Unicorn?

 

Need a special access ramp for your wheelchair? Can't run the required course in the required time? Can't do the required number of pushups?

 

Not really a "morning person" and refuse to get out of bed before noon?


All can be reasons for denial.

 

The Military has one job. War. Anything else is a distraction and a liability.
 

Did someone just scream "That isn't Fair"? War is VERY unfair, there are no exceptions made for being special or challenged or socially wonderful.

 

YOU change yourself to meet Military standards. Not the other way around.


I say again: You don't change the Military... you must change yourself.


The Military doesn't need to accommodate anyone with special issues. The Military needs to Win Wars.

 

If any of your personal issues are a liability that detract from readiness or lethality... Thank you for applying and good luck in future endeavors. Who's next in line?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Bunghole said:

 

 

If any of your personal issues are a liability that detract from readiness or lethality... Thank you for applying and good luck in future endeavors. Who's next in line?

 

 

Unless you want to get shitfaced & sock the wife around a bit.  All due respect but this image of our service members as iron-willed pillars of discipline and rational thinking is pure fantasy.  There is a no-joke mental health epidemic with America's war vets and it's sure as shit not because a few of the fellas wish they had lady parts.  If this is really a psych issue, evaluate them on an individual basis like we would anyone else. If it's really about a Holy Book then fuck the fuck off with the jingoism.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't necessarily agree with all of that either, it's just something I copied and pasted from the web. But most of it is true, but this is more in reference to getting into the military at the beginning, not dealing with mental, PTSD, transgender, etc stuff afteryou are already serving. That's a lot harder to deal with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/21/2017 at 6:27 PM, Bunghole said:

I don't necessarily agree with all of that either, it's just something I copied and pasted from the web. But most of it is true, but this is more in reference to getting into the military at the beginning, not dealing with mental, PTSD, transgender, etc stuff afteryou are already serving. That's a lot harder to deal with.

 

To be clear, my comments were directed at the writer or more generally that mindset, not you for posting it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it is funny whenever a vet claims "I know what I am talking about because I have actually been in the military", and then another vet contradicts the first one.  It takes a lot more than being a vet to understand this issue.

 

in 2016 RAND Corporation did an extensive study on allowing transgender people to serve in the military and how it would impact health care costs and readiness.  They concluded that there would be little to no effect.........https://www.rand.org/news/press/2016/06/30.html

 

Meanwhile the military has been lowering its entrance standards because they can not meet their recruiting goals.  A transgender recruit is better than no recruit at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...