Court rejects Trump's transgender troop ban

a reply to: TonyS

Well I'm not gay or a trans person so you don't have to apologize to me, but I do feel for the people who were and did serve during those times. But for discriminatory DADT turned out to be in the long run, it was a decent compromise on Bill's part during the 90's because at the time the military didn't want to budge on allowing them altogether.

I dont understand why this is an issue. Some seem to think it is because people will enlist just to have the military pay for the operation? That seems highly doubtfull to me.

They just need a reason to hate. There are people who sign up to stay out of jail, to get free education or have the military pay for it after they get out, for the bragging rights, to pick up women, and many more reasons that aren't enlisting because its your patriotic duty. Yet transgenders supposedly signing up to take advantage of military give aways are the problem. Yeah. Right.

a reply to: ladyinwaiting

That's true, but seriously, with each election further polarizing the public, the entire US political system is nothing more than a "process" for self-induced conflict.

originally posted by: ladyinwaiting

originally posted by: GuidedKill
Good send them lady boys to the front line!!!

wow, I think even the most hate-filled of folks would have been ashamed to post that.

why is that hate filled? I for one am glad they volunteered! I said both ladies and boys. Would it be hate filled to say good send them infantry boys to the front?


Are you implying that a Transgender person would have to be encouraged other ways to fight? I know many officer and war accounts where commander have said "send them to the front"! Is it homophobic if I say it and pertains to a transgender?


This is really confusing.

originally posted by: Liquesence

originally posted by: GuidedKill
Good send them lady boys to the front line!!!

Why them?

Because their in the military and that's what they volunteered for....we are talking about the military right?

Are you seriously asking why we would send out members of the military to the front??

originally posted by: GuidedKill

originally posted by: ladyinwaiting

originally posted by: GuidedKill
Good send them lady boys to the front line!!!

wow, I think even the most hate-filled of folks would have been ashamed to post that.

why is that hate filled? I for one am glad they volunteered! I said both ladies and boys. Would it be hate filled to say good send them infantry boys to the front?


Are you implying that a Transgender person would have to be encouraged other ways to fight? I know many officer and war accounts where commander have said "send them to the front"! Is it homophobic if I say it and pertains to a transgender?


This is really confusing.

Your meaning was clear. I have no further comments.

originally posted by: ladyinwaiting

originally posted by: GuidedKill

originally posted by: ladyinwaiting

originally posted by: GuidedKill
Good send them lady boys to the front line!!!

wow, I think even the most hate-filled of folks would have been ashamed to post that.

why is that hate filled? I for one am glad they volunteered! I said both ladies and boys. Would it be hate filled to say good send them infantry boys to the front?


Are you implying that a Transgender person would have to be encouraged other ways to fight? I know many officer and war accounts where commander have said "send them to the front"! Is it homophobic if I say it and pertains to a transgender?


This is really confusing.

Your meaning was clear. I have no further comments.

I really hope this isn't a precursor to the military we are attempting to become. An over sensitive, I'm the victim military.

Imagine the idea of asking a member of the military to go to the front lines.....SHOCKING!!! OH THE HUMANITY!!


Give me a break!! If transgender or anyone wants to serve good!! No grab your rifle and head to the front line and fight! Isn't that exactly the right you and others are on here squawking about? Transgenders right to fight....and then when asked to fight it's homophobic?

a reply to: GuidedKill

I said both ladies and boys.

No you didn't. What you said was:

Good send them lady boys to the front line!!!

The fact that you're trying to spin that as you saying "I said both ladies and boys" is absolutely ludicrous.

You said what you said. Own it. If you lack the intestinal fortitude to own it, don't say it to begin with.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: GuidedKill

How about they just do the MOS they signed up for. If I were a transgender doing Military Intelligence, I'd be pretty peeved if I got transferred to 11B and sent to the "front lines" just because I'm transgender. I'm petty sure that is also discrimination.

So you're saying hypothetically in a war situation, a military base, on the front line and taking fire. A cook, or a intelligence officer, or a mechanic is going to say..."Hey this is not my MOS, this is not my job to fight" or "hey man I'm just the cook, I make fires I'm not here to fight". GIVE ME A BREAK!!!

It's the military, granted everyone has a specific job but everyone is there to fight. And no matter the job if you are asked to fight you better fight. Or face charges am I not correct? LBGTHXYZ or whatever you are. You are a soldier first....Always.


That statement however says a lot about the character of the person who thinks that. It is a real representation of a non team player. You know the guy at work who sits next to a stinking trash can but just bitches about it instead of doing something because "it's not their job"

I'm glad the military is mostly made up of team players other than the "its not my job guy"

originally posted by: Devino
a reply to: SlapMonkey
So at best they should evaluate these supposed disorders on an individual basis and not some blanket policy that is considered unconstitutional by the court in the OP.

Actually, the court in the OP didn't declare the ban unconstitutional, the judge put a stay on the directive to discharge transgender people based on the directive (and to continue their medical care while they're in).

And, no, it's not "best" for the military to take every applicant and evaluate them in-depth before determining their ability to serve--that would be a dramatic waste of time, money, and resources, just to appease the few handfuls of people whose dream it may be to serve in the military.

The hard truth is that the military is not for everyone, isn't meant to be for everyone, and there is absolutely zero right enshrined in the constitution that military service must be attainable by everyone. If it were, there would be no administrative chapters at all.

Look, my MOS while in the Army was 27D (Paralegal Specialist), and when I worked for a few years in the Criminal Law Division, I typed up more administrative chapters than you could count. The bottom line is that the process to discharge people from the military is a costly and time-consuming ordeal, and if there are known issues that may cause these issues to be repetitive unnecessarily, then those blanket bans should be in place.

I have asthma--I had to lie (at the direction of my recruiter) in order to serve, but I hadn't had asthma issues for nearly a decade at that point, so I truly assumed that my asthma was gone.

It wasn't--it took one massive thunderstorm while I was stationed in Germany to re-ignite my asthma in an attack that I will never forget. I almost died that night, because I didn't have immediate access to a rescue inhaler nor to a hospital. Because my service in the military re-kindled my asthma, the American taxpayer is now on the hook to pay me 30% disability every month and to pay for my life-long need for asthma medication AND I have access to VA healthcare.

Asthmatics are not allowed in the military for a reason beyond this expensive issue (and I'm not the only one like this, by a long shot, and asthma isn't the only thing like this). If I were deployed and I lost access to my inhalers and I were to have a severe attack, I'm dead in the field.

And we know all of this about asthma--we understand asthma and how it affects the average asthmatic quite well. We know SOME about gender dysphoria, too, but certainly not enough to just have a blanket exemption for this personality disorder and say that it's absolutely okay to allow this psychological issue into our ranks in the current combat and war-heavy environment, all under the assumption that we can be reactive to any of its issues versus pro-active.

I do think that it needs studied quite a bit more, and we can post this or that story of a transgender that served admirably (Bradley/Chelsea Manning is not one of them, BTW) in the military, but these instances should be used as parts of a much broader study, not try to be used as evidence that we need a blanket exemption for gender dysphoria--there are simply too many unknowns about it.

And it may end up that there is absolutely no problem with it, but when it comes to the military, I don't want that to be a default assumption, I want it to be relatively proven during battle, because that's when things really matter.

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: GuidedKill

I said both ladies and boys.

No you didn't. What you said was:

Good send them lady boys to the front line!!!

The fact that you're trying to spin that as you saying "I said both ladies and boys" is absolutely ludicrous.

You said what you said. Own it. If you lack the intestinal fortitude to own it, don't say it to begin with.

Did you see me edit it? LOL

a reply to: GuidedKill

You've clearly never served before, and DEFINITELY have never been to a warzone before.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: GuidedKill

You've clearly never served before, and DEFINITELY have never been to a warzone before.

And you're a real General Patton aren't you??

You know nothing about me or what I know or don't know...You just hate I pointed out you're the "it's not my job" kind of person.

a reply to: strongfp

You missed the entire point of my post, to which Carewemust replied.

You've never been in the U.S. Military, have you? You've never worked in the JAG Corp, actually typing up and having to brief commanders on what they can and cannot do concerning administrative discharges, have you?

I have.

My entire point had nothing to do with 'cases of catastrophe'--that's not even an intelligent metric by which to base an argument. And how do you know that "there wasn't an issue with transgender people in the military before?" I mean, you haven't served in the U.S. military, right (an assumption based on your Canadian location)? If not, how do you know what you claim is a fact?

You don't. And you have zero idea as to the time, effort, and cost that it takes to train and maintain Soldiers, let alone to provide medical care (physical and psychological) and deal with administrative chapters that already exist that could cause these people with a known personality disorder (according to the DMS-IV, the standard used for personality disorders in the Army) to be administratively discharged.

But, please, let's keep pushing the narrative that I would only make my comment because you assume that I'm a straight old man calling people out based on the metric that they're "not normal people."

originally posted by: GuidedKill

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: GuidedKill

I said both ladies and boys.

No you didn't. What you said was:

Good send them lady boys to the front line!!!

The fact that you're trying to spin that as you saying "I said both ladies and boys" is absolutely ludicrous.

You said what you said. Own it. If you lack the intestinal fortitude to own it, don't say it to begin with.

Did you see me edit it? LOL

I pretty clearly contrasted your first comment with what you're now trying to pretend is what you said.

LOL

originally posted by: GuidedKill

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: GuidedKill

You've clearly never served before, and DEFINITELY have never been to a warzone before.

And you're a real General Patton aren't you??

As someone who has actually BEEN in the military and experienced having to do a different MOS while in combat, I'm speaking from experience. No they don't send the cooks out to go shoot guns unless there is a HUGE dearth of soldiers available.

You know nothing about me or what I know or don't know...You just hate I pointed out you're the "it's not my job" kind of person.

I know that your words betray your experiences.

a reply to: SlapMonkey

People don't want to hear everything that it entails to make the military a "safe zone" for everyone.

Very well put together post to highlight only a small fractions of the costs and time to make the military for everyone.

People are to worried about being PC or hurting someone's feelings instead of just being realistic.

originally posted by: Shamrock6

originally posted by: GuidedKill

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: GuidedKill

I said both ladies and boys.

No you didn't. What you said was:

Good send them lady boys to the front line!!!

The fact that you're trying to spin that as you saying "I said both ladies and boys" is absolutely ludicrous.

You said what you said. Own it. If you lack the intestinal fortitude to own it, don't say it to begin with.

Did you see me edit it? LOL

I pretty clearly contrasted your first comment with what you're now trying to pretend is what you said.

LOL

I said lady and boys, how you put them together is up to you. LOL

I don't know how to pretend to say anything other than what I said...Define it how you wish.....

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: GuidedKill

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: GuidedKill

You've clearly never served before, and DEFINITELY have never been to a warzone before.

And you're a real General Patton aren't you??

As someone who has actually BEEN in the military and experienced having to do a different MOS while in combat, I'm speaking from experience. No they don't send the cooks out to go shoot guns unless there is a HUGE dearth of soldiers available.

You know nothing about me or what I know or don't know...You just hate I pointed out you're the "it's not my job" kind of person.

I know that your words betray your experiences.

So a person is not a solider first? All people in the military don't go thought Basic Training? Boot Camp doesn't consist of shooting and other basic training of a solider?


You would think a person of your extensive military experience would have known something as basic as this. I guess cooks only go through cook camp and ONLY learn how to flip pancakes. And mechanics ONLY go to wrench camp ONLY and learn how to change oil....Fascinating!! Tell me more!!

originally posted by: GuidedKill
So a person is not a solider first? All people in the military don't go thought Basic Training? Boot Camp doesn't consist of shooting and other basic training of a solider?


You would think a person of your extensive military experience would have known something as basic as this. I guess cooks only go through cook camp and ONLY learn how to flip pancakes. And mechanics ONLY go to wrench camp ONLY and learn how to change oil....Fascinating!! Tell me more!!

Yet again you show that you suck at reading my posts... I suggest you go back to school and study reading comprehension.

No they don't send the cooks out to go shoot guns unless there is a HUGE dearth of soldiers available.

Just because you are a soldier first doesn't mean they will just pull soldiers from any random MOS to fill the combat arms MOS'. The military will draw from other combat arms MOS' first. Like in my situation. I was field artillery but ended up doing convoy security. Why would we send the very people we needed to fix our vehicles or feed us out side the fence?

Use some common sense man!

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: GuidedKill
So a person is not a solider first? All people in the military don't go thought Basic Training? Boot Camp doesn't consist of shooting and other basic training of a solider?


You would think a person of your extensive military experience would have known something as basic as this. I guess cooks only go through cook camp and ONLY learn how to flip pancakes. And mechanics ONLY go to wrench camp ONLY and learn how to change oil....Fascinating!! Tell me more!!

Yet again you show that you suck at reading my posts... I suggest you go back to school and study reading comprehension.

No they don't send the cooks out to go shoot guns unless there is a HUGE dearth of soldiers available.

Just because you are a soldier first doesn't mean they will just pull soldiers from any random MOS to fill the combat arms MOS'. The military will draw from other combat arms MOS' first. Like in my situation. I was field artillery but ended up doing convoy security.

Use some common sense man!

Ok so we agree everyone in the military is a solider first right....Good were getting somewhere....

So now that we agree everyone is a soldier first, why would it be offensive to ask a solider to go to the front line? Or is it only offensive if that soldier is Trans? Is the military going to be constrained on what they can ask their trans soldier to do? Why would you or anyone get upset by some saying "send them to the front lines"? Are we to handle the Trans soldier different from say a heterosexual soldier?


Please elaborate why it is offensive to ask a trans to take a bullet for this country? Isn't that what the signed up for?