Court rejects Trump's transgender troop ban

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Bro all you have to do is provide the military records of a transgender that served in the military and then provide testimony from people they served with that swear that everything was sunshine and butterflies for them and everybody around them. Why won't you just do that instead of trying to deflect?

#umadbro?

a reply to: Krazysh0t

You just don't like someone dissecting your argument and asking you to back up the claims you're making. You choose to ignore the real issues and just want to focus on what's PC. I get it, being PC is the new cool. But being PC will not negate the thousands of issues Transgenders will face in the military. Issues that are still there.

And heck I don't even know if you remember but I said I was glad they were allowed to join...I even recommended them for front line infantry duties!! A Transgender can take a bullet for this country just as easily as a natural born sexual or whatever person.

You and others here are the ones who got bent out of shape that I recommended them for front line duty....As if for some reason it was homophobic to ask them to serve by dying.....Isn't that what we may ask of all soldiers?

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Bro all you have to do is provide the military records of a transgender that served in the military and then provide testimony from people they served with that swear that everything was sunshine and butterflies for them and everybody around them. Why won't you just do that instead of trying to deflect?

#umadbro?

All he had to do is provide one.....Couldn't even do that.

BTW....Nice to see your obsession isn't fading....

a reply to: Shamrock6

Yeah. It's a shame I want to maintain my sanity instead of trying to acquiesce to a purposely impossible request. Maybe I'm not cut out for ATS anymore... Too much rationality or something.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

All good man. More than one member here seems to think that the inability to provide some absurdly high level of "evidence" negates an entire argument for some reason.

Best to just recognize it for the bovine excrement it is and avoid it altogether.

a reply to: Shamrock6

Yeah. At the end of the day, trans people are serving openly in the military for some time now and the military has been making many strides towards acceptance and things are getting better for them all the time. Rape against women is high in the military too, but that doesn't mean every woman is raped or is mistreated while serving.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

I'm gonna need you to provide the military record of a woman that claims she wasn't raped while serving, and also sworn (I'll settle for notarized) testimony from anybody she ever came across while she was in (even if it was only a guy who stood behind her in line at the Class VI once) swearing that not only did they not rape her, that nobody else did.

I'll wait.

And now we see the echo chamber of the LBGTXYZ community!!

What we are seeing in the last few posts are people who are not willing to discuss the issues. People who are biased and are not tolerant to people that may not agree with them. People that if you disagree with them and point out holes in their argument they retreat to their safe space echo chamber and high five each other on their moral superiority...

I expect nothing less from the Liberal LBGTXYZ community! You guys are a real shining example of what we can expect from your movement!!


Carry on....





P.S. I gave everyone in their safe space a star....just to be PC, kind of like a participation medal. You didn't win but we acknowledge your attempt at playing the game!!

a reply to: Shamrock6

Darn! You got me!

Too bad Obama has pushed his personal cravings and agenda onto everything in America.
a reply to: Southern Guardian

a reply to: GuidedKill

Lol. Did you just adopt a persecution complex because I don't want to talk to you anymore? That's. That's pretty funny!

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: GuidedKill

Lol. Did you just adopt a persecution complex because I don't want to talk to you anymore? That's. That's pretty funny!

Um I didn't see your name anywhere on my post....Guilty conscious?

a reply to: GuidedKill

Ha! You're funny.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: GuidedKill

Ha! You're funny.

As well as right on the money!!!

TY

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: GuidedKill

Here's a few sources on the subject.
This Military Times source says that 41% of service members disapprove of the transgender policy and only 12% approve but the majority of the service members are ambivalent about it. Source

Be careful how you're reading into those numbers--the actual responses were as to how the policy affects "military readiness," not whether or not the respondents approve or disapprove of the policy.

Here's a study that notes that as much as 30% of the m-t-f trans people join the military:
Study

What is the point of citing this, though? It does nothing to prove or disprove anything that is being discussed in this thread, only to show that 3x the regular number of people in that tiny, tiny section of the American population join the military--it doesn't even go into the specifics of their service. Did they all see at least their original enlistment through and were separated with an honorable discharge? Did a large portion of them have disciplinary issues? Were any of them court-martialed or administratively discharged?

Those are the types of things that matter in a thread focused on the pretense that this "special" group of people should receive a blanket pass at enlistment. I have posted valid concerns as to why this should not be the case, and it has nothing to do with personal feelings about transgendered people, the issue of gender dysphoria as a medical concern, or anything other than military policy and DSM-IV that guides these policies concerning personality disorders.

The percentage of M2F trans folks as just a number is irrelevant to any of this.

A collection of anecdotes from trans soldiers serving in the military. Stories

I couldn't get that page to load on the network that I'm on right now, but I can say as a standard statement that this issue is not and should not be one that is decided by the court of public opinion, or polls conducted by military members. The commander-in-chief is not beholden to either of those groups when it comes to things like hiring practices and standards, and quite honestly, there is a time and place when disregarding these groups to make the hard decisions is the absolutely appropriate thing to do.

In regards to the OP and topic of this thread, I think that Trump made an appropriate call, at least with barring enlistment from a certain point on. With that stance, though, comes the belief that he should be studying the employment of Service Members already in service in order to gain a better incite as to whether or not this really is a hindrance "to the mission," so to speak.

Personally, I'm uncertain, especially based on the guidelines currently used in the military to determine one's fitness for duty. If we can better understand the underlying causes/variables that cause an individual to be transgender, then it will help remove many variables that are currently unknown and therefore should cause us to pause before sending these individuals into war in a group where others rely on their mental fitness. Until that happens, though, then the military should not be used as a running test--but I do believe that those already serving should be grandfathered in and left to serve as long as they are willing and able.

originally posted by: SlapMonkey
Be careful how you're reading into those numbers--the actual responses were as to how the policy affects "military readiness," not whether or not the respondents approve or disapprove of the policy.

Yes, but I was merely commenting on the one set of figures. Though I understand your point. I feel like the military readiness point is also a good point since it basically says that trans people don't negatively effect that either.

What is the point of citing this, though? It does nothing to prove or disprove anything that is being discussed in this thread, only to show that 3x the regular number of people in that tiny, tiny section of the American population join the military--it doesn't even go into the specifics of their service. Did they all see at least their original enlistment through and were separated with an honorable discharge? Did a large portion of them have disciplinary issues? Were any of them court-martialed or administratively discharged?

Those are the types of things that matter in a thread focused on the pretense that this "special" group of people should receive a blanket pass at enlistment. I have posted valid concerns as to why this should not be the case, and it has nothing to do with personal feelings about transgendered people, the issue of gender dysphoria as a medical concern, or anything other than military policy and DSM-IV that guides these policies concerning personality disorders.

The percentage of M2F trans folks as just a number is irrelevant to any of this.

Just trying to show that a high number of m2f trans people sign up. There has to be something compelling them, no?

I couldn't get that page to load on the network that I'm on right now, but I can say as a standard statement that this issue is not and should not be one that is decided by the court of public opinion, or polls conducted by military members. The commander-in-chief is not beholden to either of those groups when it comes to things like hiring practices and standards, and quite honestly, there is a time and place when disregarding these groups to make the hard decisions is the absolutely appropriate thing to do.

In regards to the OP and topic of this thread, I think that Trump made an appropriate call, at least with barring enlistment from a certain point on. With that stance, though, comes the belief that he should be studying the employment of Service Members already in service in order to gain a better incite as to whether or not this really is a hindrance "to the mission," so to speak.

The President made the right call even though the majority of the country, congress, and even the military itself disagrees with him? Yeah. I highly disagree with you. The only thing I DO agree with is that he was technically allowed to do it, which often is the primary motivator for why Trump does what he does. However, just because you CAN doesn't mean you SHOULD.

Trump should stop pretending like he knows everything and ACTUALLY recognize that others may be more knowledge on things than him. Then he needs to take their advise over his ideas.

Personally, I'm uncertain, especially based on the guidelines currently used in the military to determine one's fitness for duty. If we can better understand the underlying causes/variables that cause an individual to be transgender, then it will help remove many variables that are currently unknown and therefore should cause us to pause before sending these individuals into war in a group where others rely on their mental fitness. Until that happens, though, then the military should not be used as a running test--but I do believe that those already serving should be grandfathered in and left to serve as long as they are willing and able.

I feel like you are a man on a search for a problem that doesn't exist. These people have been serving with few to no issues outside of what we expected (like intolerance and rape) for a while now. It's not like Trump canceled this policy shortly after it was enacted already. We already know that trans people function just fine in the military. All you need to do is open you eyes.

a reply to: SlapMonkey

Until that happens, though, then the military should not be used as a running test--but I do believe that those already serving should be grandfathered in and left to serve as long as they are willing and able.

100% agree. And I think that's where he stepped on his own crank big time: with forcing out those who are already in (some of whom had been in for several years already).

The military isn't there to be the social experiment that some folks want to make it. If you want to make some sweeping change to things, you've got to study it near to death. You can't just wake up one morning and announce on Twitter that you've decided something is going to change in a drastic way. And that's regardless of what the "thing" is that you announce you're going to change.

My contention with it comes from the logistical perspective. I don't know what all drugs a transperson has to take, but I imagine it's at least a few of them. That creates the potential for a supply problem. What makes it on the helo for a drop at a COP in the middle of nowhere, the trans' drugs or antibiotics? Both are necessary for health and welfare, and if there's a weight issue on the helo...then what?

Gender reassignment surgery takes months to come back from. The whole transition process can take years. If a person starts the process after they finish their MOS school, will they be transitioning the entire time they're under contract?

Like I've said, I have no personal problem with trans or gays serving. But there's a logistical angle to it that needs to be figured out one way or another, and it needs to be figured out definitively.

ETA - all that being said, this is an incredibly small number of people so whatever "problems" are identified aren't terribly likely to be hugely impactful in any way.

I must say, this thread has really devolved into something disappointing. I was hoping to hold a logical discussion with some people in here, yet it has predictably become a parade of appeals to emotion and ideological ramblings.

originally posted by: GuidedKill

I expect nothing less from the Liberal LBGTXYZ community! You guys are a real shining example of what we can expect from your movement!!

Not everyone who supports the LGBT community is liberal.

I support them, have many very, dear friends and family who are the "G" or "L" in that acronym, and see them as human beings that have just as much to offer this world as anyone else.

I still don't think the military is the place they should serve. Even if 10% of other soldiers were uncomfortable, it's not a great environment. You do you know shower with other soldiers right? Bunk with them.. sit in a foxhole with them, etc. Saying they shouldn't be in the military is not a knock against them. It's simply saying that soldiers in situations where lives are are stake, should not have to deal with the ramifications of those who have chose that lifestyle. And there is NO way the military should pay for their surgery, that makes no sense.

Suicide rate is very high for transgender people, and that too, should be considered. Someone with suicidal thoughts and access to military weapons? The "in" way to kill yourself it seems, is to take people with you. Not a great situation.

I agree grandfather in those already there, but curtail surgeries.. and would support no new transgender in the military.

originally posted by: SlapMonkey
I must say, this thread has really devolved into something disappointing. I was hoping to hold a logical discussion with some people in here, yet it has predictably become a parade of appeals to emotion and ideological ramblings.

 

originally posted by: GuidedKill

I expect nothing less from the Liberal LBGTXYZ community! You guys are a real shining example of what we can expect from your movement!!

Not everyone who supports the LGBT community is liberal.

I support them, have many very, dear friends and family who are the "G" or "L" in that acronym, and see them as human beings that have just as much to offer this world as anyone else.

I never once said I had anything against LBGT or anyone who wants to do anything with their personal lives. I am having a discussion about how Transgender fit into the military and are the making the military more battle ready or taking the focus away from what's important to the military complex.

The problem is people are emotionally involved and therefore can't have a discussion about it. Fact is my sister is Lesbian happily married with children. I have many gay friends however I can say I am not personally friends with anyone Transgender. That doesn't meant I dislike them. I can tell you my sister and I as well as my Gay friends have discussed this in the past and there are many many different views.

The point is discussion. I poked the nest on purpose to expose the hypocrisy of people who say they are tolerant....only to expose them as the intolerant ones...If you don't agree with their agenda you're a homophobe of bigot....

It's really enlightening