Ban on transgender troops to be lifted July 1

[oldpink]

Wait
Is all this hullabaloo over the fact that the military would prefer to concentrate on military readiness and winning, while eschewing catering to every niche group most likely to vote a straight Democrat ticket?
Oh, and anyone using the faux-argument that the military was willing to accept this latest favored group for the far left should be reminded that that was foisted upon the military by President Social Justicer Warrior himself, not willingly accepted.

 

[Timjoebillybob]

I am lost on your point or contention. From a mental health perspective, I'm not awarding points for those unsuccessful in their attempts as an indication they are less bent in the head than those that succeed !! They could just as easily be inept. The 18 - 44 demographic making up what, 80% of today's active duty force? This doesn't look good for the home team in battle scenarios. As one who has served, I support Trump's contention though his tactics need some polishing.

My point of contention is that you were using two different stats. Which ended with a incorrect answer. You stated that the suicide rate of trans people was 25x high, that is incorrect. It is 10x or less depending on demographics. I made the same argument as you above, I just like to see the argument made accurately.

 

[T.Lex]

Mattis was on vacation when Trump tweeted transgender ban - Business Insider

Just gonna put that here.

Sources close to Mattis told the Times that he was "appalled" by Trump's rollout of the policy, which shocked many in the Pentagon and left active-duty transgender service people unsure of their fate.

...
Trump's decision to "not accept or allow" transgender service people comes after Obama essentially invited them to come forward and openly express their gender identity. It also follows a 2016 study commissioned by the Pentagon that found that transgender inclusion would have “have minimal impact on readiness and health care costs” for the 1.4 million strong US military.

And then it gets interesting. Who is playing politics with this issue?

But multiple congressional sources told Politico that Trump actually rushed the decision to nail down the last few remaining votes on a $790 billion spending bill that included money for a border wall, one of Trump's first campaign promises.
When infighting between House GOP representatives threatened to derail the spending bill if it didn't prohibit spending defense funds on treatment for transgender service people, some representatives sought out Trump to take care of the problem via executive action, according to Politico.
Trump responded by not only suspending funding, but announcing a complete ban on transgender service.

 

[oldpink]

Mattis was on vacation when Trump tweeted transgender ban - Business Insider

Just gonna put that here.



And then it gets interesting. Who is playing politics with this issue?

Any particular reason that this is such a difficult issue to understand?
How much time did you serve in the military to be so confident about what would be best for accomplishing the military's purpose, stated concisely as killing people and breaking things?

 

[T.Lex]

Any particular reason that this is such a difficult issue to understand?

Because the policy, as stated on Twitter, is irrational. It is hard for me to understand how those who defend a complete ban can do so while ignoring their claim to snowflake status because they don't like icky people.

How much time did you serve in the military to be so confident about what would be best for accomplishing the military's purpose, stated concisely as killing people and breaking things?

What is so hard to understand that people have served in the military honorably, successfully participating in killing people and breaking things all while being uncomfortable with their gender?

Re: Suicide - although I haven't found good numbers, it appears that active duty suicides in the military is a couple hundred a year. Even assuming 1,000 trans military members, and the entire group of suicides was trans, then that is below the non-military average. The military must be doing something right to either get the stable ones, or provide the kind of support network to help them avoid that outcome.

Re: ongoing med - look, I'm willing to concede that the post-op hormone replacements are appropriately considered as affecting the readiness issue. But then, it also sounds like there are other conditions - i.e. menopause and female-related issues, etc. - that are properly examined with the same criteria, also. For INGO purposes, I'm willing to say that post-op trans banning is a legitimate issue. But, how many trans ban defenders are willing to admit that pre-op trans don't really have that medical issue?

 

[ArcadiaGP]

Haven't read through all the pages of this conversation, but are you guys talking about legit dysphoria instances, or modern "I wanna be something else" sorts that have no actual mental problems?

Is it possible to diagnose the former, and avoid the latter?

Does the latter even care about serving in the military? I'd have to say probably not.

 

[T.Lex]

Any particular reason that this is such a difficult issue to understand?
How much time did you serve in the military to be so confident about what would be best for accomplishing the military's purpose, stated concisely as killing people and breaking things?

Just realized I may have taken these questions too literally.

Personally, I know a couple trans people. One of whom grew up with an above-average interest in the military, but did decide to do other things. So, part of the reason I have difficult understanding a complete ban on trans in the military is that they don't seem icky to me. Really, they are pretty normal. The wrestle with their own demons, and parts of the situation confuse the snot out of me, but they do not deserve to be treated like untouchables.

Haven't read through all the pages of this conversation, but are you guys talking about legit dysphoria instances, or modern "I wanna be something else" sorts that have no actual mental problems?

Is it possible to diagnose the former, and avoid the latter?

For myself, I am confining to legitimate gender identity issues, not the Klinger-esque pretending or capricious experimentation stuff. And, if you believe the DSM-5, there does appear to be a way to diagnose whether someone's gender identity issues interfere with their ability to function.

 

[oldpink]

Just realized I may have taken these questions too literally.

Personally, I know a couple trans people. One of whom grew up with an above-average interest in the military, but did decide to do other things. So, part of the reason I have difficult understanding a complete ban on trans in the military is that they don't seem icky to me. Really, they are pretty normal. The wrestle with their own demons, and parts of the situation confuse the snot out of me, but they do not deserve to be treated like untouchables.


For myself, I am confining to legitimate gender identity issues, not the Klinger-esque pretending or capricious experimentation stuff. And, if you believe the DSM-5, there does appear to be a way to diagnose whether someone's gender identity issues interfere with their ability to function.

Just as with nearly everything else, the DSM has become highly politically corrected.

 

[Timjoebillybob]

Because the policy, as stated on Twitter, is irrational. It is hard for me to understand how those who defend a complete ban can do so while ignoring their claim to snowflake status because they don't like icky people.

What is so hard to understand that people have served in the military honorably, successfully participating in killing people and breaking things all while being uncomfortable with their gender?

Re: Suicide - although I haven't found good numbers, it appears that active duty suicides in the military is a couple hundred a year. Even assuming 1,000 trans military members, and the entire group of suicides was trans, then that is below the non-military average. The military must be doing something right to either get the stable ones, or provide the kind of support network to help them avoid that outcome.

Re: ongoing med - look, I'm willing to concede that the post-op hormone replacements are appropriately considered as affecting the readiness issue. But then, it also sounds like there are other conditions - i.e. menopause and female-related issues, etc. - that are properly examined with the same criteria, also. For INGO purposes, I'm willing to say that post-op trans banning is a legitimate issue. But, how many trans ban defenders are willing to admit that pre-op trans don't really have that medical issue?

I disagree that it is irrational, and no not because they are "icky" personally I have no problem with them.

What is so hard to understand that over half have mental disorders that would prohibit them from joining? And don't tell me that someone who is depressed or has anxiety disorders can't fool a shrink.

Not sure how you figured that. Per 1000 people in the US about 13 commit suicide, 46 attempt. So if there were 1000 trans military personnel, and a couple hundred of them attempted/committed suicide that would be way over the national average.

They take the meds before and after gender reassignment surgery, iirc they have to be on them for at least 2 yrs per standard medical practice before they are eligible for the surgery.

Haven't read through all the pages of this conversation, but are you guys talking about legit dysphoria instances, or modern "I wanna be something else" sorts that have no actual mental problems?

Is it possible to diagnose the former, and avoid the latter?

Does the latter even care about serving in the military? I'd have to say probably not.

Gender dysphoria per the latest DSM isn't just thinking you should be the other gender, it requires that it interferes in your life. Over half of all trans per studies would meet the requirements.

Is it possible? If the person is honest, yes. If not, no. Unless a person is seriously wacked out, they can fool a shrink.

Personally, I know a couple trans people. One of whom grew up with an above-average interest in the military, but did decide to do other things. So, part of the reason I have difficult understanding a complete ban on trans in the military is that they don't seem icky to me. Really, they are pretty normal. The wrestle with their own demons, and parts of the situation confuse the snot out of me, but they do not deserve to be treated like untouchables.


And, if you believe the DSM-5, there does appear to be a way to diagnose whether someone's gender identity issues interfere with their ability to function.

I've known one, heck I was related to them by marriage. First time I met them post op, heck first time I found out they were trans was at my Dad's funeral. My sister introduced us, she's like Tim do you remember X, I'm like yes. She say this is X. I gave her a hug and told her glad she could make it.

No one is saying they should be treated like untouchables, at least not most here. What I and most others are saying is that due to the extremely high rate of disqualifying mental illnesses they should not be allowed to serve. Have people with schizophrenia "served in the military honorably, successfully participating in killing people and breaking things"? I'm going to guess yes, at least a few. Does that mean we should let schizophrenics in? How about people with severe paranoia?

Yes it is possible to diagnose, if the person wants to be diagnosed. If they don't it's not that hard to hide.

Just as with nearly everything else, the DSM has become highly politically corrected.

First time this was addressed in the DSM was 1980, it was called Gender Identity Disorder. The latest version changed the name to Gender Dysphoria. The standards of diagnoses has stayed pretty much the same.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

U.S. court bars the Administration from changing military policy on service by transgender people.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

Federal judge refuses to put ruling on hold that will allow transgender military recruits come Jan. 1

Pentagon says it will allow transgenders to enlist Jan 1.

 

[Brad69]

So if I enlisted as a chick could I retire again?

I would get quarters for “cramps” everyday!

 

[HoughMade]

U.S. court bars the Administration from changing military policy on service by transgender people.

Pfft...separation of powers? Never heard of her.

 

[2A_Tom]

And we incur the cost of medical procedures.

https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/AFSP-Williams-Suicide-Report-Final.pdf

 

[T.Lex]

And we incur the cost of medical procedures.

https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/AFSP-Williams-Suicide-Report-Final.pdf

I admittedly skimmed that doc, but didn't see where it says "we" pay for the procedures.

If anything, that doc suggests that "we" pay for the increased risk of suicides be people who could otherwise be valuable members of society.

 

[HoughMade]

And we incur the cost of medical procedures.

https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/AFSP-Williams-Suicide-Report-Final.pdf

But ya see, if everyone were just accepting and this was a social norm, there wouldn't be a suicide problem.

 

[2A_Tom]

I admittedly skimmed that doc, but didn't see where it says "we" pay for the procedures.

If anything, that doc suggests that "we" pay for the increased risk of suicides be people who could otherwise be valuable members of society.

I am sorry I was pointing out the two major problems with the government taking responsibility for their health issues, both physical and psycological.

But I was not clear.

 

[actaeon277]

So if I enlisted as a chick could I retire again?

I would get quarters for “cramps” everyday!

[video=youtube;6k2FkUF41AA]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6k2FkUF41AA[/video]

 

[ArcadiaGP]

 

[HoughMade]

So what you're saying is that in the Air Force, not much will change.