Should transgender people be allowed to serve in the military?

[Jredbaron96]

Nice. I did one enlistment with the 82nd. After my enlistment, I choose the GI Bill over Ranger School and 4 more years of peacetime training. I didn't join for the GI Bill. I left an expensive private university to enlist during war (Gulf 1). I joined to go to war on the front line, not to camp.



IIRC, he was a truck driver. I could be wrong.

I think cpwill was an intel officer. Jerry was a truck driver IIRC.

 

[ALiberalModerate]

Why does no one have a problem with this? I keep seeing this thrown up as if it's acceptable? Why is the military paying for someone to get a hard on? Cut that $$ from the budget now!

I would imagine that the military wants their soldiers to have a good home life with their wife as well, and if they can't perform, that is a big impediment to that. The psychological issues with that would have to manifest itself on the field as well.

 

[molten_dragon]

As long as they can meet the other prerequisites for serving, I see no reason they shouldn't be allowed.

 

[Josie]

I think typically they would only require estrogen if they were male to female, or testosterone if they were female to male. Neither of those are very expensive at all as they are both cheap generics. The military spends 5 times more on viagra than transgender services. The Pentagon spends 5 times more on Viagra than transgender services - Business Insider

And they shouldn't do that either.

 

[X Factor]

That's perfect. I'm now far more satisfied with my choice in this poll.

My explanation is a lot less interesting than Eco's so let's just stick with his.

 

[Brochacholomigo]

My explanation is a lot less interesting than Eco's so let's just stick with his.

I promise, I can handle the truth. Let's hear it anyway.

 

[ocean515]

I say........ come aboard shipmate!

Then shut up, do your job, and don't expect the Navy to pay for your sex change.

I defer to your experience over the emotional appeal this issue is trying to sell.

It seems to me the military has a mission.

Joining the military is to participate in service to that mission.

How does this whole issue relate to serving that mission?

 

[X Factor]

I promise, I can handle the truth. Let's hear it anyway.

It was kind of parody (or should that be parrot-y) of the "bird in the hand is worth two in the bush" saying and just a nonsensical throw away poll option, but I messed it up so I was like, oh just forget it.

 

[Parrish]

Anyone have the stats on the # of reassignment surgeries the DoD has authorized?

 

[Josie]

It was kind of parody (or should that be parrot-y) of the "bird in the hand is worth two in the bush" saying and just a nonsensical throw away poll option, but I messed it up so I was like, oh just forget it.

*chuckle*

 

[Ikari]

Overall, I'm not sure the percentage of people in the military who are transgendered, though I cannot imagine it's a huge number. So likely it's a null issue anyway. But if it doesn't interfere or hamper military action or efficiency, then I don't think it's really a problem.

 

[Dragonfly]

so long as they, or anyone, can measure up to the physical standards and conduct parameters, I see no problem with it.

This is what I posted in another thread on this topic:

#1) men are allowed in
#2) women are allowed in
#3) our military is 100% voluntary

I see no reason why ANYONE who can pass the basic requirements to fill some position within the military should be barred from doing so.

 

[X Factor]

This is what I posted in another thread on this topic:

There's another thread on this topic? :shock:

 

[Dragonfly]

I say........ come aboard shipmate!

Then shut up, do your job, and don't expect the Navy to pay for your sex change.

I believe most people who fully support a transgender person serving in the military, DO NOT support the idea of the Military/Government paying for the surgery.

 

[ALiberalModerate]

And they shouldn't do that either.

From a psychological perspective, it would not be good for the military when it has soldiers having sexual dysfunction issues with their wife or girlfriend. The military is an employer that offers benefits. One of those benefits is health coverage. Why should that work any different than any other employer? Any other large employer's health plan would cover viagra or hormone treatments. Why should the military be any different?

 

[ecofarm]

An "investment" suggests the potential for positive returns for the person putting their money into it. In the case of the GI Bill, it is a good thing, beneficial to the US as a whole for someone who's served in the military to be able to support themselves financially, not to mention paying into the system now with taxes. People with good jobs, made possible through higher education, to share the tax burden is the potential positive return.

I don't know much about trans people really and most of what I do know, I've gotten from DP and what I've been made aware of is that being trans does not make it easier to get a job or career and is, in fact, a hindrance. To call it an "investment" is an inaccurate use of the term. SRS would be more of a onesided benefit.

SRS is an investment in the future. It's good for the person, allowing them to live comfortably and reach their potential. This is good not only for the individual (the reduction or elimination of depression and other difficulties) but for society as well, as the person becomes more productive and more likely to seek out friends and thereby be a positive influence on their community. It's making a person whole, and that can change not only the person but everyone they interact with.

Can you tell me why SRS is different than cosmetic surgery?

It addresses a condition that's causing the person difficulties. Can you imagine what it would be like to have a female mind and male body? I can't.

 

[earthworm]

I do not know
I think our military can be fussy and particular, selective and serious .. it may not be ''right'' . . . The generals seem to say NO, but they tend to be very conservative ..
Just exactly what is the percentage of those with sexual identity problems ?
1 %
0.1 %
?
Why not accept them ''after the dust has settled" ?

 

[X Factor]

SRS is an investment in the future. It's good for the person, allowing them to live comfortably and reach their potential. This is good not only for the individual (the reduction or elimination of depression and other difficulties) but for society as well, as the person becomes more productive and more likely to seek out friends and thereby be a positive influence on their community. It's making a person whole, and that can change not only the person but everyone they interact with.

That's a tenuous at best.

It addresses a condition that's causing the person difficulties. Can you imagine what it would be like to have a female mind and male body? I can't.

So does plastic surgery. No, couldn't imagine that any more than I could imagine being 600 lbs and needing a gastric bypass.

 

[Gimmesometruth]

If they require a lot of medical attention - no. Just as anyone with a different issue that requires a lot of medical attention shouldn't (and isn't) allowed to join the military.

Like...women...right?

 

[Peter King]

The medical cost reason Trump mentioned is BS, much more (and we are talking between 5 and 18 times) is spent on viagra. And Trump wants 600 billion extra for the military but those few millions for TG health care is too much :lamo

 

[Harry Guerrilla]

Why is Viagra the go to thing to criticize medical expenditures.
I'm not saying I disagree with SRS being a legitimate medical treatment, but Viagra is a legitimate medical treatment.

 

[American]

Leadership didn't have anything to do with trusting each other, performance did. We had gays (at least 2 were pretty obvious) in our company (this was during 'don't ask don't tell') and none of us cared. They were good soldiers. We could count on them.

Being gay doesn't cost anything extra, and other problems involved that the services shouldn't have to deal with.

 

[Absentglare]

Leadership didn't have anything to do with trusting each other, performance did. We had gays (at least 2 were pretty obvious) in our company (this was during 'don't ask don't tell') and none of us cared. They were good soldiers. We could count on them.

It is the obligation of leadership to ensure that each individual's performance exceeds the standard required of their position. If, for whatever reason, performance is lacking, it is the responsibility of leadership to address.

 

[Dragonfly]

Quite a large number of reasons why the military won't, or might not take someone trying to enlist:

Medical Conditions That May Prevent You From Joining the Military | Military.com

I'm sure the number of people the above conditions prevents from joining is magnitudes higher than the number of Transgenders trying to join.

However if somebody is Trans, and already serving, an they've not ever been a problem in the role they're serving in I see no reason to force them out.

 

[RetiredUSN]

I defer to your experience over the emotional appeal this issue is trying to sell.

It seems to me the military has a mission.

Joining the military is to participate in service to that mission.

How does this whole issue relate to serving that mission?

A trans person can work the enginerooms as well as any other person.