Trump Bans Transgenders from the Military

[ClydeR]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DFqauQfUIAEVND7.jpg

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DFqdAq7UQAAL_wn.jpg

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DFqeKBjVYAEpITW.jpg




As a candidate, Trump promised (https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/742771576039460864), "Thank you to the LGBT community! I will fight for you while Hillary brings in more people that will threaten your freedoms and beliefs." Trump is keeping that promise today, if you think about it, because they wouldn't like being in the military anyway. The ones in there now will be happy to be let go.

[Tgo01]

Yeah this seems like an unnecessary move.

[Jhynnifer]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DFqauQfUIAEVND7.jpg

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DFqdAq7UQAAL_wn.jpg

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DFqeKBjVYAEpITW.jpg




As a candidate, Trump promised (https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/742771576039460864), "Thank you to the LGBT community! I will fight for you while Hillary brings in more people that will threaten your freedoms and beliefs." Trump is keeping that promise today, if you think about it, because they wouldn't like being in the military anyway. The ones in there now will be happy to be let go.

Wow, he couldn't even word that in a way that wasn't utterly offensive.

[Tgo01]

Wow, he couldn't even word that in a way that wasn't utterly offensive.

Also I get that he likes using Twitter to bypass the media and all of that, but if he insists on going down this path he really should have released the information in a more professional manner.

[cwolff]

Also I get that he likes using Twitter to bypass the media and all of that, but if he insists on going down this path he really should have released the information in a more professional manner.

Apparently this is the let trump be trump strategy. It seems like political suicide. I keep wondering if they have an end game strategy or if the WH wings it everyday.

[Neveragain]

Sound policy, anyone that has the least bit of study in psychology knows that these people suffer from delusion. Joining in the delusion is only preventing these people from getting the proper care they are in need of.

[cwolff]

He might as well stop integration in combat arms as well. Cite the cost savings. I wonder if he's got the balls for that

[time4fun]

I teared up a bit when I saw this. I've got a friend who's trans and works as a Federal Prosecutor. He spends his days defending justice in this country, and his country just told him that justice doesn't apply to him. I wonder how long before Trump decides the Executive branch will no longer cover his T.

I don't care how anyone felt about Clinton. We're rolling back civil rights, we have one of the architects of voter suppression doing an "assessment" of voting practices, our President and his campaign are under active investigation for colluding with a foreign enemy, the President fired the FBI Director for refusing to back down on the investigation and is harrassing our AG to get him to resign so he can replace him with a someone he can control, tens of millions of people may be about to lose health insurance, and we've got North Korea threatening to use nuclear weapons on us.

It's a hard reminder that progress is fragile.

[Gelston]

He might as well stop integration in combat arms as well. Cite the cost savings. I wonder if he's got the balls for that

Having been someone that served in a combat arms unit on multiple deployments, I'd prefer they did. Having females there simply as the FET caused enough damn problems.

[Tgo01]

I've got a friend who's trans

Of course.


He spends his days defending justice in this country, and his country just told him that justice doesn't apply to him.

Wait what?


and we've got North Korea threatening to use nuclear weapons on us.

Once again your entire paragraph was a bunch of hysterical nonsense, but how are you blaming this on Trump?

[Tgo01]

Having been someone that served in a combat arms unit on multiple deployments, I'd prefer they did. Having females there simply as the FET caused enough damn problems.

FET?

[Gelston]

FET?

Female Engagement Team. They sent these four women with use to talk to the Afghan women because men couldn't. They sat around braiding hair getting no intelligence for us at all and causing us to sit around providing security all day for no fucking reason. And they took an entire tent for themselves, so instead of 80 men spread between 4 GP tents, it was 80 men spread between 3 with 4 women in one.

[hello]

FET?

Female engagement team.

[Tgo01]

Female Engagement Team. They sent these four women with use to talk to the Afghan women because men couldn't. They sat around braiding hair getting no intelligence for us at all and causing us to sit around providing security all day for no fucking reason. And they took an entire tent for themselves, so instead of 80 men spread between 4 GP tents, it was 80 men spread between 3 with 4 women in one.

Patriarchy at it's finest.

[Taernath]

Female Engagement Team. They sent these four women with use to talk to the Afghan women because men couldn't. They sat around braiding hair getting no intelligence for us at all and causing us to sit around providing security all day for no fucking reason. And they took an entire tent for themselves, so instead of 80 men spread between 4 GP tents, it was 80 men spread between 3 with 4 women in one.

Ours tried to claim one of the two latrines we built as the 'female' one, but that didn't fly. Overall it wasn't a big deal, the most drama we had came from a retard who tried to take pictures of one of the women when she was changing.

[Gelston]

Patriarchy at it's finest.

I don't give a fuck what its about, it hurt combat readiness and effectiveness. The military exists to go out there and shoot motherfuckers.

[Tgo01]

I don't give a fuck what its about

It was a joke because the women got better conditions than the men. Don't hurt me :(

[Candor]

I don't give a fuck what its about, it hurt combat readiness and effectiveness. The military exists to go out there and shoot motherfuckers.

...and to break stuff. But yes.

[Fortybox]

LOL - let the butt hurt from the left commence.

The left says this dismantles progress yet they are perfectly fine with destroying the moral values that have upheld this country since its founding.

If Obama posted a tweet that said all Christians couldn't be in the military, progressives would be just fine. I for one am glad Trump is doing this.

Make no mistake, progressivism has launched a full out war to fundamentally transform this country.

[Whirlin]

The left says this dismantles progress yet they are perfectly fine with destroying the moral values that have upheld this country since its founding.


Yay, we're bringing back rights to vote only held by male land owners and slavery!

[Savageheart]

Speaking of gaslighting at it's finest.

I don't have strong feelings about this one other than he was a tactless dick about the announcement I guess?

I feel like the next administration whenever that is will just reverse the ruling, and this is a somewhat ham handed and desperate attempt for approval from his diminishing base.

[Fortybox]

Yay, we're bringing back rights to vote only held by male land owners and slavery!

Woohoo! Great way to have my post "whirl" over your head!!!

NOT MY MODERATOR!

[Whirlin]

Woohoo! Great way to have my post "whirl" over your head!!!

NOT MY MODERATOR!
Doesn't matter, I won the vote. Get over it.

[Fortybox]

Doesn't matter, I won the vote. Get over it.

Not the popular vote. That's what matters!!!111one

[Tgo01]

Not the popular vote. That's what matters!!!111one

AH SNAP!

[Whirlin]

Not the popular vote. That's what matters!!!111one
I won the popular vote.

[Savageheart]

Don't ruin the narrative with facts, this is the politics sub.

[Fortybox]

I won the popular vote.

Tgo did but had to bow out due to perceived Russian collusion. OMG Whirlin please do try to keep up.

[cwolff]

This guy says its a campaign tactic.


Here is how one administration official justified the move in a quote given to Axios’s Jonathan Swan:

This forces Democrats in Rust Belt states like Ohio, Michigan, and Wisconsin to take complete ownership of this issue. How will blue collar voters in these states respond when senators up for reelection in 2018 like Debbie Stabenow are forced to make their opposition to this a key plank of their campaigns?

[Destrier]

The mission of the U.S. Army is "to fight and win our Nation's wars, by providing prompt, sustained, land dominance, across the full range of military operations and the spectrum of conflict, in support of combatant commanders.

Not to act as a testing ground for every new social idea or issue that comes up. Anything that detracts from readiness, cohesiveness, and combat power is to be avoided.

John

[cwolff]

From a WaPo article citing studies by Rand about costs to allow tg in the military


The study didn't include estimates of these costs for reservists, because of their “highly limited military health care eligibility.” It also didn't include estimates for retirees or military family members, because many of those individuals may also have “limited eligibility” for care via military treatment facilities.

“The implication is that even in the most extreme scenario that we were able to identify … we expect only a 0.13-percent ($8.4 million out of $6.2 billion) increase in health care spending,” Rand's authors concluded

[hello]

The mission of the U.S. Army is "to fight and win our Nation's wars, by providing prompt, sustained, land dominance, across the full range of military operations and the spectrum of conflict, in support of combatant commanders.

Not to act as a testing ground for every new social idea or issue that comes up. Anything that detracts from readiness, cohesiveness, and combat power is to be avoided.

John

Hell yeah! Shit like going into some god forsaken land half way around the world and providing education, infrastructure building, food, and government support is fucking not part of the mission!... oh wait..

[Parkbandit]

I teared up a bit when I saw this.

I was going to post that I didn't think this was a good move by President Trump... but then I read this.

4 more years.

4 more years.

[Ashliana]

4 more years.

I like how you sincerely think Trump is going to survive his entire first term, much less get re-elected. :rofl:

[Tgo01]

I like how you sincerely think Trump is going to survive his entire first term, much less get re-elected. :rofl:

Reported to secret service.

[Gelston]

Honestly, just wait to get the operation AFTER you get out if you want to serve. I mean, they don't allow in motherfuckers with asthma or flat footedness, why the fuck should the allow in someone with an elective surgery that requires them to take shit tons of pills? Having jacked up teeth puts you in non-deployable status, so you're damn sure taking shit tons of treatments and pills would. It isn't because "Gross Trannies!" it is for military readiness.

[Methais]

I like how you sincerely think Trump is going to survive his entire first term, much less get re-elected. :rofl:

Remember when Trump had 0 chance of beating Hillary?

[time4fun]

The mission of the U.S. Army is "to fight and win our Nation's wars, by providing prompt, sustained, land dominance, across the full range of military operations and the spectrum of conflict, in support of combatant commanders.

Not to act as a testing ground for every new social idea or issue that comes up. Anything that detracts from readiness, cohesiveness, and combat power is to be avoided.

John

You seem to have forgotten that this issue was studied extensively by the Military for a year, and the research was more or less unanimous- it doesn't negatively impact combat rediness. (http://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR1530.html).


Everyone here knows exactly why this decision was made, and it had nothing to do with impact on combat rediness.

[hello]

Honestly, just wait to get the operation AFTER you get out if you want to serve. I mean, they don't allow in motherfuckers with asthma or flat footedness, why the fuck should the allow in someone with an elective surgery that requires them to take shit tons of pills? Having jacked up teeth puts you in non-deployable status, so you're damn sure taking shit tons of treatments and pills would. It isn't because "Gross Trannies!" it is for military readiness.

It's not just about the surgery, which is a very small percentage (and the last last step of someone transitioning) it's him disallowing someone who identifies as male who according to military doctors are female and vice versa. That's the problem, it's more social than it is medical.

[Ashliana]

Remember when Trump had 0 chance of beating Hillary?

I remember Trump having a slim chance, not "0." Rolling 1 on a D100 still happens pretty often. As an avid Gemstone player, one would think you'd understand that. And that was before all this happened.

Do you still believe Trump's "business acumen" is going to somehow translate into an ability to govern? Or have you not turned on the news since January?

[Tgo01]

Rolling 1 on a D100 still happens pretty often.

About 1 in 100.

[Destrier]

You seem to have forgotten that this issue was studied extensively by the Military for a year, and the research was more or less unanimous- it doesn't negatively impact combat rediness. (http://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR1530.html).


Everyone here knows exactly why this decision was made, and it had nothing to do with impact on combat rediness.

You have obviously never served in a combat unit. (going to make an assumption here, feel free to correct me).

[hello]

You have obviously never served in a combat unit. (going to make an assumption here, feel free to correct me).

So let them serve in a non-combat role, put them in admin or whatever. Trumps basically saying in no way shape or form will they serve period.

[Gelston]

You seem to have forgotten that this issue was studied extensively by the Military for a year, and the research was more or less unanimous- it doesn't negatively impact combat rediness. (http://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR1530.html).


Everyone here knows exactly why this decision was made, and it had nothing to do with impact on combat rediness.

Now she is going to say she is an expert on the military.

[time4fun]

You have obviously never served in a combat unit. (going to make an assumption here, feel free to correct me).

No- dated someone in the Navy for 4 years, but, in fairness, it was the navy. He was rarely even on a ship, let alone in combat.

But whether or not I- or you- have been a part of a combat unit is irrelevant. It doesn't negate the research that was intitiated and run through the US Military.

This disgusting move was done for purely political reasons, and it flies in the face of the conclusions the Military had already reached on the subject.

[Tgo01]

Now she is going to say she is an expert on the military.

23 degrees on being a general.

[Tgo01]

No- dated someone in the Navy for 4 years

Of course!


but, in fairness, it was the navy.

Holy shit. I think that's the first time I actually laughed at something time4fun said, instead of just laughing at her.

[Gelston]

I know lots of guys that served in the Navy that were never on ships. They were called Navy Corpsman, and they'd fucking die for you.

[Taernath]

The mission of the U.S. Army is "to fight and win our Nation's wars, by providing prompt, sustained, land dominance, across the full range of military operations and the spectrum of conflict, in support of combatant commanders.

Not to act as a testing ground for every new social idea or issue that comes up. Anything that detracts from readiness, cohesiveness, and combat power is to be avoided.

John

The army was actually very forward thinking when it comes to "social ideas". They were one of the first organizations to allow blacks to serve in integrated units. The same arguments about "readiness, cohesiveness and combat power" were used against blacks, too.

[Destrier]

No- dated someone in the Navy for 4 years, but, in fairness, it was the navy. He was rarely even on a ship, let alone in combat.

But whether or not I- or you- have been a part of a combat unit is irrelevant. It doesn't negate the research that was intitiated and run through the US Military.

This disgusting move was done for purely political reasons, and it flies in the face of the conclusions the Military had already reached on the subject.

The disgusting move I see. Is a continued attempt to weaken the U.S. military services through forced social experimentation. When the country can take care of the Veterans all ready under their care for wounds suffered through service. Then maybe it will be time to look at spending more funds on issues such as this. But for now. The issue is settled. The CIC took recommendations from the Joint Chiefs. Case closed. I hear there will be jobs in construction on the southern border soon.

[cwolff]

Shit, if a country like Israel can allow it we don't need to be scared.

[ClydeR]

Trump made the announcement on the 69th anniversary of Truman's desegregation of the military.


This Day in Truman History
July 26, 1948
President Truman issues Executive Order No. 9981 Desegregating the Military

More... (https://www.trumanlibrary.org/anniversaries/desegblurb.htm)

[Destrier]

Shit, if a country like Israel can allow it we don't need to be scared.

Well Israel is surrounded, everyone serves, because they need every swinging dick in the fight, and those without, no really they do.. (cackle)

We have less than 1% of the population in Uniform. We are apparently have 'warrior privilege' and are more selective than some other Countries.

[Tgo01]

Shit, if a country like Israel can allow it we don't need to be scared.

That's kind of an odd way to phrase it considering how relatively progressive Israel is.

Reserve this type of language for when a backwards ass Muslim nation allows transgenders in their military.

[Gelston]

Hell, we can pick and choose who we want in. Have a GED? Sorry, you technically qualify, but you aren't getting in without 12 college credit hours.

[Fortybox]

No- dated someone in the Navy for 4 years, but, in fairness, it was the navy. He was rarely even on a ship, let alone in combat.

But whether or not I- or you- have been a part of a combat unit is irrelevant. It doesn't negate the research that was intitiated and run through the US Military.

This disgusting move was done for purely political reasons, and it flies in the face of the conclusions the Military had already reached on the subject.

The lefts outrage is purely political.

Let's let this tiny minority dictate to 99.7% of Americans what to do! You've been rejected. Deal with it.

[Wrathbringer]

The lefts outrage is purely political.

Let's let this tiny minority dictate to 99.7% of Americans what to do! You've been rejected. Deal with it.

This. You lost get over it.

[Ashliana]

The lefts outrage is purely political.

Let's let this tiny minority dictate to 99.7% of Americans what to do! You've been rejected. Deal with it.

They're "dealing with it" with criticism. Criticism of Trump, who claimed things like:

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/742771576039460864

[Tgo01]

Criticism of Trump, who claimed things like:

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/742771576039460864

I don't see how this move takes away anyone's freedoms or beliefs.

[Wrathbringer]

They're "dealing with it" with criticism. Criticism of Trump, who claimed things like:

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/742771576039460864

Lol @ your rep

[Ashliana]

I don't see how this move takes away anyone's freedoms or beliefs.

He stated he'd "fight for the LGBTQ community." Does this look like fighting on their behalf? And this isn't the first thing. First it was this (https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/22/us/politics/devos-sessions-transgender-students-rights.html), then this (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwigxuvi3afVAhUDNSYKHaWyARoQFggxMAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fthehill.com%2Fhomenews%2Fadminist ration%2F340344-trump-breaks-tradition-doesnt-recognize-lgbt-pride-month&usg=AFQjCNE71Io_FPPjPEp37anMcx-awWdDeg), not to mention picking Pence as VP, or filling his transition team and eventually administration (https://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2016/12/15/trump-cabinet-who-who-homophobia/9UDr8MnXIQAxjO369qzT0J/story.html) up with other notorious bigots.

His actions RE:LGBT rights are just a tiny slice of the dumpster fire that makes up his presidency.

[Neveragain]

He stated he'd "fight for the LGBTQ community." Does this look like fighting on their behalf? And this isn't the first thing. First it was this (https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/22/us/politics/devos-sessions-transgender-students-rights.html), then this (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwigxuvi3afVAhUDNSYKHaWyARoQFggxMAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fthehill.com%2Fhomenews%2Fadminist ration%2F340344-trump-breaks-tradition-doesnt-recognize-lgbt-pride-month&usg=AFQjCNE71Io_FPPjPEp37anMcx-awWdDeg), not to mention picking Pence as VP, or filling his transition team and eventually administration (https://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2016/12/15/trump-cabinet-who-who-homophobia/9UDr8MnXIQAxjO369qzT0J/story.html) up with other notorious bigots.

His actions RE:LGBT rights are just a tiny slice of the dumpster fire that makes up his presidency.

What rights were taken?

What fire?

[Destrier]

He stated he'd "fight for the LGBTQ community." Does this look like fighting on their behalf? And this isn't the first thing. First it was this (https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/22/us/politics/devos-sessions-transgender-students-rights.html), then this (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwigxuvi3afVAhUDNSYKHaWyARoQFggxMAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fthehill.com%2Fhomenews%2Fadminist ration%2F340344-trump-breaks-tradition-doesnt-recognize-lgbt-pride-month&usg=AFQjCNE71Io_FPPjPEp37anMcx-awWdDeg), not to mention picking Pence as VP, or filling his transition team and eventually administration (https://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2016/12/15/trump-cabinet-who-who-homophobia/9UDr8MnXIQAxjO369qzT0J/story.html) up with other notorious bigots.

His actions RE:LGBT rights are just a tiny slice of the dumpster fire that makes up his presidency.

Primary roll of a President is defense of the Nation. So that means making decisions that is best for the 100% not only the % of any one group.

I would really like people to realize this issue, is not on whats best for 'Bill and or Betty individual'.

It is what is best for the Military to do it's job.

The Military discriminates. Deal with it. They have standards for behavior, fitness, uniforms, and a code of conduct. All of it is required to maintain the good order and discipline of the force. Especially under austere, and oft times dangerous places.

The Military is not about 'Bill and Betty individual' it is about the force as a whole and the accomplishment of the tasks set before them.

We gave up individual liberties during our time of service. The world did not revolve around 'us' as individuals. But around our team, squad, platoon, company, battalion, brigade etc.

Have a great day.

[Tgo01]

And this isn't the first thing. First it was this (https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/22/us/politics/devos-sessions-transgender-students-rights.html), then this (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwigxuvi3afVAhUDNSYKHaWyARoQFggxMAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fthehill.com%2Fhomenews%2Fadminist ration%2F340344-trump-breaks-tradition-doesnt-recognize-lgbt-pride-month&usg=AFQjCNE71Io_FPPjPEp37anMcx-awWdDeg), not to mention picking Pence as VP, or filling his transition team and eventually administration (https://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2016/12/15/trump-cabinet-who-who-homophobia/9UDr8MnXIQAxjO369qzT0J/story.html) up with other notorious bigots.

You really went ahead and brought up the bathroom thing and LGBT pride month. Wow.

Then to complete the stupid sandwich you go ahead and of course refer to him entire administration as bigots because why the fuck not?

[time4fun]

Primary roll of a President is defense of the Nation. So that means making decisions that is best for the 100% not only the % of any one group.

I would really like people to realize this issue, is not on whats best for 'Bill and or Betty individual'.

It is what is best for the Military to do it's job.

The Military discriminates. Deal with it. They have standards for behavior, fitness, uniforms, and a code of conduct. All of it is required to maintain the good order and discipline of the force. Especially under austere, and oft times dangerous places.

The Military is not about 'Bill and Betty individual' it is about the force as a whole and the accomplishment of the tasks set before them.

We gave up individual liberties during our time of service. The world did not revolve around 'us' as individuals. But around our team, squad, platoon, company, battalion, brigade etc.

Have a great day.

First off- NO. We're not going to just "deal with it". If we took that stance, we'd still have segregated combat units, and LGB Americans woud be barred from service. Those examples alone make it abundently clear that there are VERY good reasons not to just "deal with it".

If the Military's own internal review found that this would have little to no impact on combat rediness, then this isn't a justification based on anything specific to the military. And though the Courts give wide leeway to the Mililtary in a way that other parts of the government don't enjoy, they have been VERY clear that the Military does not have a blanket license to discriminate for fun.

And to suggest that we just get over it is the most UNAmerican thing you could possible say.

[Astray]

I think this about stopping the potential for abuse of military coverage more than actual LGBT w/e rights. Still fucking weird.

[Neveragain]

First off- NO. We're not going to just "deal with it". If we took that stance, we'd still have segregated combat units, and LGB Americans woud be barred from service. Those examples alone make it abundently clear that there are VERY good reasons not to just "deal with it".

If the Military's own internal review found that this would have little to no impact on combat rediness, then this isn't a justification based on anything specific to the military. And though the Courts give wide leeway to the Mililtary in a way that other parts of the government don't enjoy, they have been VERY clear that the Military does not have a blanket license to discriminate for fun.

And to suggest that we just get over it is the most UNAmerican thing you could possible say.

Well you're going to have to. The military is not a place for people that have psychological problems.

God bless.

[Astray]

Well you're going to have to. The military is not a place for people that have psychological problems..

Asterisk needed.

[Methais]

He stated he'd "fight for the LGBTQ community." Does this look like fighting on their behalf? And this isn't the first thing. First it was this (https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/22/us/politics/devos-sessions-transgender-students-rights.html), then this (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwigxuvi3afVAhUDNSYKHaWyARoQFggxMAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fthehill.com%2Fhomenews%2Fadminist ration%2F340344-trump-breaks-tradition-doesnt-recognize-lgbt-pride-month&usg=AFQjCNE71Io_FPPjPEp37anMcx-awWdDeg), not to mention picking Pence as VP, or filling his transition team and eventually administration (https://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2016/12/15/trump-cabinet-who-who-homophobia/9UDr8MnXIQAxjO369qzT0J/story.html) up with other notorious bigots.

His actions RE:LGBT rights are just a tiny slice of the dumpster fire that makes up his presidency.

Less trans people will die because of this since they won't be on the dangerous battlefield.

If it saves even just one transgender life then it's worth it. Right? If not then you obviously want trans people to die.

Hateful bigot.

[Parkbandit]

No- dated someone in the Navy for 4 years, but, in fairness, it was the navy. He was rarely even on a ship, let alone in combat.

But whether or not I- or you- have been a part of a combat unit is irrelevant. It doesn't negate the research that was intitiated and run through the US Military.

This disgusting move was done for purely political reasons, and it flies in the face of the conclusions the Military had already reached on the subject.

LOL.

[Whirlin]

Primary roll of a President is defense of the Nation. So that means making decisions that is best for the 100% not only the % of any one group.

I would really like people to realize this issue, is not on whats best for 'Bill and or Betty individual'.

It is what is best for the Military to do it's job.

The Military discriminates. Deal with it. They have standards for behavior, fitness, uniforms, and a code of conduct. All of it is required to maintain the good order and discipline of the force. Especially under austere, and oft times dangerous places.

The Military is not about 'Bill and Betty individual' it is about the force as a whole and the accomplishment of the tasks set before them.

We gave up individual liberties during our time of service. The world did not revolve around 'us' as individuals. But around our team, squad, platoon, company, battalion, brigade etc.

Have a great day.
So your argument is that 1 whatever-they're-calling-themselves-community reduces an overall team's effectiveness by greater than the 1 person due to their existence within the team, even if they're overall operating within the confines of the standards of behavior, fitness, uniforms, code of contacts? Because if they're falling outside of the standards, there are already processes in there. Your argument relies on the fact that they're such demihumans that they're essentially a drain on effectiness to a point where an entire team/squad/platoon/company/battalion/brigade is WORSE off having them than not having them.

[Ashliana]

You really went ahead and brought up the bathroom thing and LGBT pride month. Wow.

Then to complete the stupid sandwich you go ahead and of course refer to him entire administration as bigots because why the fuck not?

Trump filled his administration with the most notoriously anti-gay figures on the right. Criticism of his choice to do is appropriate.

Kudos, though, on being unable to reply substantively and instead sticking to your usual strategy of replacing substance with antipathy. To the surprise of no one.

[Tgo01]

Kudos, though, on being unable to reply substantively and instead sticking to your usual strategy of replacing substance with antipathy. To the surprise of no one.

There's nothing in your post to reply substantively to.

Trump didn't follow in Obama's footsteps and declare whatever month LGBT month? The stupid transgender bathroom bullshit? Of course everyone in Trump's administration are bigots because Ashliana said so?

There is literally nothing of value in your post that deserves a "substantive" response.

[Ashliana]

There's nothing in your post to reply substantively to.

Trump didn't follow in Obama's footsteps and declare whatever month LGBT month? The stupid transgender bathroom bullshit? Of course everyone in Trump's administration are bigots because Ashliana said so?

There is literally nothing of value in your post that deserves a "substantive" response.

You not knowing anything about the people who Trump involved in his transition and eventually administration doesn't reflect on me. Did I just unilaterally declare something and not support it? Why no, I didn't -- I linked to reporting on it, which you obviously didn't read. Conversely, the only one unilaterally dismissing something here -- RE: the bathrooms -- is you, because you don't care about it, and Pride month.

Trump has filled up his administration with notorious anti-gay bigots. You disbelieve me -- apparently -- because you unilaterally, with no evidence whatsoever, BELIEVE this to not be true.

Fact: Trump picked Mike Pence as his VP, and has a clearly established, extensive track record of anti-LGBT advocacy.

Fact: Trump nominated GOP representative Tom Price as Secretary of Health and Human Services. He's currently serving, and like Pence, has a clearly established, long history of anti-LGBT advocacy (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Price_(American_politician)#Gay_rights).

Fact: Trump nominated GOP senator Jeff Sessions as Attorney General. Currently serving, like the above, has a clearly established, long history of anti-LGBT advocacy (http://www.hrc.org/blog/share-this-human-rights-campaign-slams-senate-confirmation-of-jeff-sessions) and consistently maintained, for years, a 0 from HRC on their yearly analysis of support for LGBT issues.

Fact: Trump nominated former GOP congressman Mark Green to be Secretary of the Army. He was not confirmed, and his nomination was withdrawn. He was, however, nominated and confirmed to the head of the Agency for International Development. Similarly, has a long, clearly established anti-gay record (https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2017/05/05/army-secretary-nominee-withdraws-over-gay-comments/101340654/).

Fact: Trump nominated Betsy Devos, "whose family’s foundation has given millions of dollars to groups working against LGBT equality" to Secretary of Education, and currently serves.

It goes on and on and on and on. You don't have any idea what you're talking about. So yes, you decided to replace substance with antipathy, as you always do. You're the personification of intellectual dishonesty.

[Fortybox]

They're "dealing with it" with criticism. Criticism of Trump, who claimed things like:

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/742771576039460864

What they should be doing is analyzing why they were rejected instead of crying about it.

It must suck waking up everyday and hating America.

[Wrathbringer]

You not knowing anything about the people who Trump involved in his transition and eventually administration doesn't reflect on me. Did I just unilaterally declare something and not support it? Why no, I didn't -- I linked to reporting on it, which you obviously didn't read. Conversely, the only one unilaterally dismissing something here -- RE: the bathrooms -- is you, because you don't care about it, and Pride month.

So yes, you decided to replace substance with antipathy, as you always do. You're the personification of intellectual dishonesty.

Lol @your rep, Assliana.

[Destrier]

I am saying, I would not want to fill a company with people regardless of 'issues'. That are going to require me to risk the lives of pilots, drivers, and security to get them back and forth for personal choice procedures when down range. Or, before deploying, once I get them integrated, build the additional facilities for them, they then 'can't deploy' due to a recovery or upcoming surgery and now my unit is down 1 anyways. And I cant back fill since they are on the books and taking a slot in my unit. You know, like the pregnancy issue that pops up every time an integrated unit is scheduled to go down range. Now the individuals team is short, they have more work to do and their risk is greater. There is enough real world injuries we had to work around, 'choosing to add to that, nonsense.

I wont even go into, the Military still has separate physical standards for males and females. Figuring that out should be lovely...

Sergeant did you assume my gender on the last PT test?

This is simply another weakening of the force, by trying to push political agendas.

[Neveragain]

This means war!


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=arj7KKe1LA8

[Taernath]

I am saying, I would not want to fill a company with people regardless of 'issues'. That are going to require me to risk the lives of pilots, drivers, and security to get them back and forth for personal choice procedures when down range. Or, before deploying, once I get them integrated, build the additional facilities for them, they then 'can't deploy' due to a recovery or upcoming surgery and now my unit is down 1 anyways. And I cant back fill since they are on the books and taking a slot in my unit. You know, like the pregnancy issue that pops up every time an integrated unit is scheduled to go down range. Now the individuals team is short, they have more work to do and their risk is greater. There is enough real world injuries we had to work around, 'choosing to add to that, nonsense.

How many people per unit do you foresee getting gender reassignment surgery? I'm betting there will be so few that most commanders will never have to deal with it, and if they do, it will be handled the way every single other personnel replacement is done - find a new warm body from guys who just graduated boot or an individual deployer and put them in the slot. The military is hardly going to grind to a halt over this, nevermind that the surgery absolutely would put you in a non-deployable status in the first place.

[time4fun]

You not knowing anything about the people who Trump involved in his transition and eventually administration doesn't reflect on me. Did I just unilaterally declare something and not support it? Why no, I didn't -- I linked to reporting on it, which you obviously didn't read. Conversely, the only one unilaterally dismissing something here -- RE: the bathrooms -- is you, because you don't care about it, and Pride month.

Trump has filled up his administration with notorious anti-gay bigots. You disbelieve me -- apparently -- because you unilaterally, with no evidence whatsoever, BELIEVE this to not be true.

Fact: Trump picked Mike Pence as his VP, and has a clearly established, extensive track record of anti-LGBT advocacy.

Fact: Trump nominated GOP representative Tom Price as Secretary of Health and Human Services. He's currently serving, and like Pence, has a clearly established, long history of anti-LGBT advocacy (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Price_(American_politician)#Gay_rights).

Fact: Trump nominated GOP senator Jeff Sessions as Attorney General. Currently serving, like the above, has a clearly established, long history of anti-LGBT advocacy (http://www.hrc.org/blog/share-this-human-rights-campaign-slams-senate-confirmation-of-jeff-sessions) and consistently maintained, for years, a 0 from HRC on their yearly analysis of support for LGBT issues.

Fact: Trump nominated former GOP congressman Mark Green to be Secretary of the Army. He was not confirmed, and his nomination was withdrawn. He was, however, nominated and confirmed to the head of the Agency for International Development. Similarly, has a long, clearly established anti-gay record (https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2017/05/05/army-secretary-nominee-withdraws-over-gay-comments/101340654/).

Fact: Trump nominated Betsy Devos, "whose family’s foundation has given millions of dollars to groups working against LGBT equality" to Secretary of Education, and currently serves.

It goes on and on and on and on. You don't have any idea what you're talking about. So yes, you decided to replace substance with antipathy, as you always do. You're the personification of intellectual dishonesty.

This is all really important. This was not a decision that was initiated organically within the Military. This was a decision that was made from the top down- stemming from the cadre of disturbingy anti-LGBTQ people that Trump brought into power. And he's doing this for reasons that are low, even for him.

[Wrathbringer]

This is all really important. This was not a decision that was initiated organically within the Military. This was a decision that was made from the top down- stemming from the cadre of disturbingy anti-LGBTQ people that Trump brought into power. And he's doing this for reasons that are low, even for him.

This is all really retarded.

[HeyJoe]

I am saying, I would not want to fill a company with people regardless of 'issues'. That are going to require me to risk the lives of pilots, drivers, and security to get them back and forth for personal choice procedures when down range. Or, before deploying, once I get them integrated, build the additional facilities for them, they then 'can't deploy' due to a recovery or upcoming surgery and now my unit is down 1 anyways. And I cant back fill since they are on the books and taking a slot in my unit. You know, like the pregnancy issue that pops up every time an integrated unit is scheduled to go down range. Now the individuals team is short, they have more work to do and their risk is greater. There is enough real world injuries we had to work around, 'choosing to add to that, nonsense.

I wont even go into, the Military still has separate physical standards for males and females. Figuring that out should be lovely...

Sergeant did you assume my gender on the last PT test?

This is simply another weakening of the force, by trying to push political agendas.

This is a false narrative. The Army, and MEDCOM specifically, already have policies and procedures in place regarding transgender and sexual reassignment. The only time it would prevent someone from being deployable would be during recovery from surgery, which would not be schedule when your unit is due to deploy, just like you wouldn't be able to get corrective eye surgery when your unit is supposed to deploy.

And no, those policies don't let you just tell your sergeant that they assumed your gender.

Taking care of your Soldiers isn't a weakening of the force, it's a strengthening of it.

[Savageheart]

Well as stated by Sanders this was a military assessment not a budgetary one.

I do think its hilarious we spend five times more on boner pills though.

[Pin]

That are going to require me to risk the lives of pilots, drivers, and security to get them back and forth for personal choice procedures when down range.

When I was in the Army - if you claimed you were suicidal, they took away your shoe laces so you couldn't hang yourself with them. I kinda have a feeling if somebody is trans they understand that they can't be rushed around at the expense of the mission - nor would the military allow them to dictate when they could have non essential surgery.


I wont even go into, the Military still has separate physical standards for males and females. Figuring that out should be lovely...

Sergeant did you assume my gender on the last PT test?

So...you don't think there are trans people in the military already?

[drauz]

This guy says its a campaign tactic.

From what I understand this was done to push a spending bill thru that was getting held up due to transgender issues in it.

[time4fun]

It's funny how the people who are the first to tell everyone around them that we should treat servicemembers with deep respect are the first to turn around and say "Screw the trans servicemembers- they don't count".

I didn't realize the "respect servicemembers and treat them with respect" really meant "except the ones I don't feel particulary respectul towards".

[Methais]

It's funny

This is no laughing matter. Why can't you ever be serious?

https://media.giphy.com/media/QgixZj4y3TwnS/giphy.gif

[Back]

Can Trump even seriously do this? Or is just another of his brain farts on twitter?

In his tweet he says he spoke to his generals and military experts but the pentagon and everyone else says he didn't. Should we be more than a little concerned over the man's mental state?

[time4fun]

Can Trump even seriously do this? Or is just another of his brain farts on twitter?

In his tweet he says he spoke to his generals and military experts but the pentagon and everyone else says he didn't. Should we be more than a little concerned over the man's mental state?

Yes he can, unfortunately.

BUT a series of mania-driven tweets doesn't actually change policy. For now, the ban is still removed.

[Fortybox]

Yes he can, unfortunately.

BUT a series of mania-driven tweets doesn't actually change policy. For now, the ban is still removed.

I'm glad the President of the United States can tweet directly to the American people rather than have his words filtered through our corrupt media.

[Fortybox]

Current poll results on msn's main webpage:

Do you agree with President Trump's decision to ban transgender people from the military?

48% - Yes
42% - No
10% - Not sure/I don't know enough about it

Total responses: 780,218

Time4fun's view of the poll:

0% - Yes
100% - No
0% - Not sure/I don't know enough about it

Total responses: everyone in the whole world

So even on a leaning left website, the majority AGREES with Trump. Although I'm sure Time4fun will say due to her extreme awesomeness in logic, she would convince those 10% of people who are not sure/don't know so that it really would be 52% to 48%!!11one

[Tgo01]

It's funny how the people who are the first to tell everyone around them that we should treat servicemembers with deep respect are the first to turn around and say "Screw the trans servicemembers- they don't count".

I didn't realize the "respect servicemembers and treat them with respect" really meant "except the ones I don't feel particulary respectul towards".

I like Democrats suddenly pretending to give a flying fuck about our military. Weren't you the one a couple of days ago saying we should totally decimate the military's budget? Something like cutting its budget by 3/4ths? Gee, I wonder how many service people (INCLUDING TRANS AND GAYS!) would be out of a job if that happened?

[cwolff]

Slow down there hard charger. You're saying only republicans can give a shit about the military? You should just retract that.

[Tgo01]

Slow down there hard charger. You're saying only republicans can give a shit about the military? You should just retract that.

I'm saying Republicans as a whole care more about the military then Democrats as a whole, yes.

I'm also specifically pointing out what a hypocrite time4fun is by citing her very own words, yes.

I know it sucks when I'm right but you'll learn soon enough I'm right a lot. Big league.

[Back]

This whole thing can't be serious. It's just intended to distract everyone from the real issue of Trump's campaign colluding with the Russians and rigging the election.

[time4fun]

This whole thing can't be serious. It's just intended to distract everyone from the real issue of Trump's campaign colluding with the Russians and rigging the election.

Specifically to appeal the people he's actively angering with his treatment of Sessions.

It's backfiring though. Even Orrin Hatch came out against it.

They will also have a very hard time defending this in Court. The lifting of the Ban isn't hypothetical. They did it once and will have to now show that there was detriment despite their internal studies all suggesting otherwise.

[Wrathbringer]

This whole thing can't be serious. It's just intended to distract everyone from the real issue of Trump's campaign colluding with the Russians and rigging the election.

lol You're retarded.

[Jhynnifer]

Honestly, post-surgery I don't see any issue with a transgender person serving. But having read a few studies on the side-effects of hormonal therapy, I'm not entirely sure I disagree with Gelston's view that it could effect combat readiness for some pre-op. Is this true for every transgender person? Not necessarily, but not having served I don't think it's really up to me. I'd poll the military and see how the people who would be directly effected by it to see how they gauge the situation.

[hello]

Honestly, post-surgery I don't see any issue with a transgender person serving. But having read a few studies on the side-effects of hormonal therapy, I'm not entirely sure I disagree with Gelston's view that it could effect combat readiness for some pre-op. Is this true for every transgender person? Not necessarily, but not having served I don't think it's really up to me. I'd poll the military and see how the people who would be directly effected by it to see how they gauge the situation.

Honestly, I think Gelston would affect combat readiness what with his 3 1/2 pull ups.. seriously how's he gonna drag me out of that fighting hole; we'll just both end up dead.

[time4fun]

Honestly, post-surgery I don't see any issue with a transgender person serving. But having read a few studies on the side-effects of hormonal therapy, I'm not entirely sure I disagree with Gelston's view that it could effect combat readiness for some pre-op. Is this true for every transgender person? Not necessarily, but not having served I don't think it's really up to me. I'd poll the military and see how the people who would be directly effected by it to see how they gauge the situation.

Remember though- trans people are already serving openly in the military. The ban was lifted almost a year ago. Trump isn't continuing a ban, he's reinstating it. That's never happened before. It would be like suddenly announcing that LGB people or black people can no longer serve in the military- horrific and baseless.

We're not in hypothetical territory here. We already know how it's going, and it's going very, very well. The military asked for another 6 months to continue to study before they started openly recruiting transmen and transwoman into the military because they were tryiing to figure out how those people were being treated. There was no question about where they were going with the ban- it wasn't slated to return. They just wanted to be sure they were giving proper support and sensitivity training to the military.

Several studies were done, and none of the ones released publicly showed any significant impact on combat readiness.

And watching a President actively pick out a group that won some civil rights and just stripping them for political play should be incredibly offensive and unnerving for anyone watching.

[Gelston]

Honestly, I think Gelston would affect combat readiness what with his 3 1/2 pull ups.. seriously how's he gonna drag me out of that fighting hole; we'll just both end up dead.

I'd agree if I ever only did that many while I was in. I generally did about 22. I'm back up to 18 now. Thanks for playing.

[Taernath]

I'd agree if I ever only did that many while I was in. I generally did about 22. I'm back up to 18 now. Thanks for playing.

Tisket buff as fuck

[Tisket]

Tisket buff as fuck

These are the only pull ups I can do:

8765

[Jhynnifer]

Remember though- trans people are already serving openly in the military. The ban was lifted almost a year ago. Trump isn't continuing a ban, he's reinstating it. That's never happened before. It would be like suddenly announcing that LGB people or black people can no longer serve in the military- horrific and baseless.

We're not in hypothetical territory here. We already know how it's going, and it's going very, very well. The military asked for another 6 months to continue to study before they started openly recruiting transmen and transwoman into the military because they were tryiing to figure out how those people were being treated. There was no question about where they were going with the ban- it wasn't slated to return. They just wanted to be sure they were giving proper support and sensitivity training to the military.

Several studies were done, and none of the ones released publicly showed any significant impact on combat readiness.

And watching a President actively pick out a group that won some civil rights and just stripping them for political play should be incredibly offensive and unnerving for anyone watching.

I'd love to read some of these studies, because what I've read goes fairly in depth about the anxiety, depression and (in some cases) bouts of agoraphobia associated with pre-op hormone therapy. While I'm never going to stand up and say it's OK to segregate, at the end of the day I think a case can be made where a pre-op transgender person who's going through hormonal therapy probably shouldn't be the one holding the gun protecting my back. Not because he/she is incapable of it, but because they're judgement and psyche may be compromised.

Again, let me restate, I have no issue with post-op transgender or those transgender who have no intention of surgery, in the military. They're exactly the same as anyone else. I'm talking about a specific subset of the transgender population. With little to no experience with transgender people (there are none in my RL circle of friends), I can only surmise that gender reassignment surgery is comparable to other major surgeries which would make you ineligible for military service.

I also feel like this is a lot like the whole transgender bathroom issue. I get it, people feel like they should be able to use the facilities they identify with. We make a big case for allowing it, we harangue anyone against it to the point of violence... and throughout all of it, if you're a woman (for example) who feels extremely uncomfortable being in a bathroom with someone who, biologically is a male... you have no recourse but to deal with it. Because your rights are trumped by the hot-button issue of the day.

It should be up to the troops if they feel comfortable in the situation because they're the ones putting their lives on the line.

[Methais]

This whole thing can't be serious. It's just intended to distract everyone from the real issue of Trump's campaign colluding with the Russians and rigging the election.

Actually it's to distract people from the fact that Al Bundy scored four touchdowns in one game.

[Methais]

These are the only pull ups I can do:

8765

http://i.imgur.com/w5ST2e4.gif

[Ltlprprincess]

I'd love to read some of these studies, because what I've read goes fairly in depth about the anxiety, depression and (in some cases) bouts of agoraphobia associated with pre-op hormone therapy. While I'm never going to stand up and say it's OK to segregate, at the end of the day I think a case can be made where a pre-op transgender person who's going through hormonal therapy probably shouldn't be the one holding the gun protecting my back. Not because he/she is incapable of it, but because they're judgement and psyche may be compromised.

Again, let me restate, I have no issue with post-op transgender or those transgender who have no intention of surgery, in the military. They're exactly the same as anyone else. I'm talking about a specific subset of the transgender population. With little to no experience with transgender people (there are none in my RL circle of friends), I can only surmise that gender reassignment surgery is comparable to other major surgeries which would make you ineligible for military service.

I also feel like this is a lot like the whole transgender bathroom issue. I get it, people feel like they should be able to use the facilities they identify with. We make a big case for allowing it, we harangue anyone against it to the point of violence... and throughout all of it, if you're a woman (for example) who feels extremely uncomfortable being in a bathroom with someone who, biologically is a male... you have no recourse but to deal with it. Because your rights are trumped by the hot-button issue of the day.

It should be up to the troops if they feel comfortable in the situation because they're the ones putting their lives on the line.

No dog in this fight but Goddamnit this point is so on target.

[Methais]

It's only a matter of time before the left has to decide between feminism and trans-whatever as to who's more equal, and then they'll cannibalize each other while ISIS laughs at them both for doing their work for them.


No dog in this fight.

Why do you hate Michael Vick?

[time4fun]

I'd love to read some of these studies, because what I've read goes fairly in depth about the anxiety, depression and (in some cases) bouts of agoraphobia associated with pre-op hormone therapy. While I'm never going to stand up and say it's OK to segregate, at the end of the day I think a case can be made where a pre-op transgender person who's going through hormonal therapy probably shouldn't be the one holding the gun protecting my back. Not because he/she is incapable of it, but because they're judgement and psyche may be compromised.

Again, let me restate, I have no issue with post-op transgender or those transgender who have no intention of surgery, in the military. They're exactly the same as anyone else. I'm talking about a specific subset of the transgender population. With little to no experience with transgender people (there are none in my RL circle of friends), I can only surmise that gender reassignment surgery is comparable to other major surgeries which would make you ineligible for military service.

I also feel like this is a lot like the whole transgender bathroom issue. I get it, people feel like they should be able to use the facilities they identify with. We make a big case for allowing it, we harangue anyone against it to the point of violence... and throughout all of it, if you're a woman (for example) who feels extremely uncomfortable being in a bathroom with someone who, biologically is a male... you have no recourse but to deal with it. Because your rights are trumped by the hot-button issue of the day.

It should be up to the troops if they feel comfortable in the situation because they're the ones putting their lives on the line.

You're totally right to point out that transitioning isn't easy, and there's often a post-op bout of depression that hits. But it's generally a result of how many years and sacrifices we make someone endure to get to the point of being allowed to transition. If we make that process easier, provide more support, we can eliminate that stage. Making sure the military as an employer is more supportive would be a big step for these folks.

RAND (http://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR1530.html) has one of the public studies that the Military commissioned. It's a great read if you can get the full copy. I linked their findings- which more or less get you to the same point but faster.

Pulling out big picture though- every concern you listed for transitioning is also a concern for childbirth. But women aren't banned from entering the military (any more) because we may decide to have children one day. The military just makes allowances for early motherhood because that mother brings value to her job before and after childbirth that isn't erased by a few tough weeks that may or may not happen in between.

And, again, the military already decided to lift the ban almost a year ago. The people you're talking about DID get to make the call, and they said they wanted trans people to be able to serve in the miitary.

This decision to reinstate the ban didn't come from the military- it came from the President and the people around him.

[Tgo01]

But it's generally a result of how many years and sacrifices we make someone endure to get to the point of being allowed to transition. If we make that process easier, provide more support, we can eliminate that stage.

Do you have a source on this or you just relying on your feels? The idea that transgenders only deal with anxiety and depression during their hormone therapy is because people are meanie heads sounds straight up bullshit.


Pulling out big picture though- every concern you listed for transitioning is also a concern for childbirth. But women aren't banned from entering the military (any more) because we may decide to have children one day. The military just makes allowances for early motherhood because that mother brings value to her job before and after childbirth that isn't erased by a few tough weeks that may or may not happen in between.

You're actually not making a very good case for your argument here. I am almost certain that if a pregnant woman went to enlist, or if the military knows they plan on getting pregnant soon, they will turn them away. No, there isn't a blanket ban on all women because not all women plan on getting pregnant while they are in the military.


The people you're talking about DID get to make the call, and they said they wanted trans people to be able to serve in the miitary.

So Trump didn't consult with the generals and military commanders and one day just said "Meh, I hate them trannies."

Come on. I know you hate Trump and all, but this is silly even for you.

[Jhynnifer]

You're totally right to point out that transitioning isn't easy, and there's often a post-op bout of depression that hits. But it's generally a result of how many years and sacrifices we make someone endure to get to the point of being allowed to transition. If we make that process easier, provide more support, we can eliminate that stage. Making sure the military as an employer is more supportive would be a big step for these folks.

I'm not talking about the emotional journey someone who choses to transition themselves goes through. I'm talking about the mental and emotional issues that arise by putting a human body, who biologically is not meant to have the kind of testosterone/estrogen pumped through their bodies for over a year. These are two different things.



Pulling out big picture though- every concern you listed for transitioning is also a concern for childbirth. But women aren't banned from entering the military (any more) because we may decide to have children one day. The military just makes allowances for early motherhood because that mother brings value to her job before and after childbirth that isn't erased by a few tough weeks that may or may not happen in between.

If a person originally wasn't planning on gender reassignment surgery changed their mind, I'd expect them to leave the military before starting their pre-op hormone therapy. Just as I would expect a woman who was starting fertility treatments to.


And, again, the military already decided to lift the ban almost a year ago. The people you're talking about DID get to make the call, and they said they wanted trans people to be able to serve in the miitary.

This decision to reinstate the ban didn't come from the military- it came from the President and the people around him.

And trans people should have that right... right up until they decide they want surgery. Then, for their health, and the health of every soldier in their unit, they should not be allowed into active combat.

[Methais]

You're totally right to point out that transitioning isn't easy, and there's often a post-op bout of depression that hits. But it's generally a result of how many years and sacrifices we make someone endure to get to the point of being allowed to transition. If we make that process easier, provide more support, we can eliminate that stage. Making sure the military as an employer is more supportive would be a big step for these folks.

RAND (http://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR1530.html) has one of the public studies that the Military commissioned. It's a great read if you can get the full copy. I linked their findings- which more or less get you to the same point but faster.

Pulling out big picture though- every concern you listed for transitioning is also a concern for childbirth. But women aren't banned from entering the military (any more) because we may decide to have children one day. The military just makes allowances for early motherhood because that mother brings value to her job before and after childbirth that isn't erased by a few tough weeks that may or may not happen in between.

And, again, the military already decided to lift the ban almost a year ago. The people you're talking about DID get to make the call, and they said they wanted trans people to be able to serve in the miitary.

This decision to reinstate the ban didn't come from the military- it came from the President and the people around him.

You forgot to address this part of her post:


and throughout all of it, if you're a woman (for example) who feels extremely uncomfortable being in a bathroom with someone who, biologically is a male... you have no recourse but to deal with it. Because your rights are trumped by the hot-button issue of the day.

Can't possibly imagine why...

[Jhynnifer]

It's only a matter of time before the left has to decide between feminism and trans-whatever as to who's more equal, and then they'll cannibalize each other while ISIS laughs at them both for doing their work for them.


ROFL. Somedays, I love you.

[Steve]

Also I get that he likes using Twitter to bypass the media and all of that, but if he insists on going down this path he really should have released the information in a more professional manner.

Just a thought, but couldn't he also bypass the media equally well with a facebook post, provided he has more than 140 characters of words to say?

[time4fun]

I'm not talking about the emotional journey someone who choses to transition themselves goes through. I'm talking about the mental and emotional issues that arise by putting a human body, who biologically is not meant to have the kind of testosterone/estrogen pumped through their bodies for over a year. These are two different things.




If a person originally wasn't planning on gender reassignment surgery changed their mind, I'd expect them to leave the military before starting their pre-op hormone therapy. Just as I would expect a woman who was starting fertility treatments to.



And trans people should have that right... right up until they decide they want surgery. Then, for their health, and the health of every soldier in their unit, they should not be allowed into active combat.

Ahh, you mean WHILE people are taking hormones. That's actually generally an exciting and positive time for people who are transitioning, at least among my friends who have transitioned. Mood swings can certainly be part of that, but that's also true of anyone who starts an anti-depressant, thyroid medication, hormone replacement for menopause, fertility drugs (as you noted), and honestly combat...and none of those require someone to leave the military. They're trained to keep themselves under control in incredibly stressful situations.

So on the list of groups we should be concerned about in regards to their ability to handle physical and emotional stress- I feel like this is the group is pretty close to the bottom.

And, if this were a real (rather than hypothetical) problem, they would have discovered that during the year long study they did on the subject or the last year-ish after we lifted the ban. Remember- all of this was carefully studied and reviewed. This isn't like desegregating the military or even allowing LGB people to serve openly- we don't have to speculate about what's going to happen.

We already know, and the answer is: nothing.

[Wrathbringer]

You're totally right to point out that transitioning isn't easy, and there's often a post-op bout of depression that hits. But it's generally a result of how many years and sacrifices we make someone endure to get to the point of being allowed to transition. If we make that process easier, provide more support, we can eliminate that stage. Making sure the military as an employer is more supportive would be a big step for these folks.

RAND (http://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR1530.html) has one of the public studies that the Military commissioned. It's a great read if you can get the full copy. I linked their findings- which more or less get you to the same point but faster.

Pulling out big picture though- every concern you listed for transitioning is also a concern for childbirth. But women aren't banned from entering the military (any more) because we may decide to have children one day. The military just makes allowances for early motherhood because that mother brings value to her job before and after childbirth that isn't erased by a few tough weeks that may or may not happen in between.

And, again, the military already decided to lift the ban almost a year ago. The people you're talking about DID get to make the call, and they said they wanted trans people to be able to serve in the miitary.

This decision to reinstate the ban didn't come from the military- it came from the President and the people around him.

Actually, it did come from the military. They weighed in, and Trump responded accordingly. Sorry that doesn't fit your retarded narrative though.

[Wrathbringer]

Ahh, you mean WHILE people are taking hormones. That's actually generally an exciting and positive time for people who are transitioning, at least among my friends who have transitioned. Mood swings can certainly be part of that, but that's also true of anyone who starts an anti-depressant, thyroid medication, hormone replacement for menopause, fertility drugs (as you noted), and honestly combat...and none of those require someone to leave the military. They're trained to keep themselves under control in incredibly stressful situations.

So on the list of groups we should be concerned about in regards to their ability to handle physical and emotional stress- I feel like this is the group is pretty close to the bottom.

And, if this were a real (rather than hypothetical) problem, they would have discovered that during the year long study they did on the subject or the last year-ish after we lifted the ban. Remember- all of this was carefully studied and reviewed. This isn't like desegregating the military or even allowing LGB people to serve openly- we don't have to speculate about what's going to happen.

We already know, and the answer is: nothing.

I see you're also an expert on transitioning sexes. I'm unsurprised.

[Astray]

I see you're also an expert on transitioning sexes. I'm unsurprised.

When you know like, two people, it's easy to become an expert because they tell you.

[Steve]

I see you're also an expert on transitioning sexes. I'm unsurprised.

I'm not sure if you noticed, but everyone here is an expert on everything. I'm an expert on recognizing expertise.

[Wrathbringer]

When you know like, two people, it's easy to become an expert because they tell you.

lol

[Tgo01]

The more I read about this and think about it the more I'm leaning towards Trump's decision after all.

It seems Obama just wanted to score some easy political points for Democrats when he rushed to allow this change shortly before the elections.

The strange thing is it's arguments from the LEFT that actually kind of push me towards Trump's side of things.

For years now we've heard how trans people suffer from a high suicide rate and a high depression rate (and somehow it's our fault for being mean to them), now these same Democrats are saying we should allow this same group of people into the military, which also has higher suicide and depression rates, a job which entails handling firearms and could easily get your fellow soldiers killed if you're not mentally fit for the job.

[Wrathbringer]

The more I read about this and think about it the more I'm leaning towards Trump's decision after all.

It seems Obama just wanted to score some easy political points for Democrats when he rushed to allow this change shortly before the elections.

The strange thing is it's arguments from the LEFT that actually kind of push me towards Trump's side of things.

For years now we've heard how trans people suffer from a high suicide rate and a high depression rate (and somehow it's our fault for being mean to them), now these same Democrats are saying we should allow this same group of people into the military, which also has higher suicide and depression rates, a job which entails handling firearms and could easily get your fellow soldiers killed if you're not mentally fit for the job.

inb4 TRANSPHOBE!!!!11!!!!1!

[Tgo01]

at least among my friends who have transitioned.

Now she has several friends who have fully transitioned.

I sure hope we have a colony on Mars in our lifetime, I can't wait to hear about how time4fun has spent time on said colony.

[time4fun]

I'm not sure if you noticed, but everyone here is an expert on everything. I'm an expert on recognizing expertise.

I'm fairly certain Wrath isn't an expert on anything.

[time4fun]

I see you're also an expert on transitioning sexes. I'm unsurprised.

Yeah, I mean why would someone who did undergraduate and graduate work studying gender have any academic background in any of these issues. And obviously that person living in the Bay Area and going to school in the Bay Area would never be exposed to trans people.

#Logic

[Tgo01]

Yeah, I mean why would someone who did undergraduate and graduate work studying gender have any academic background in any of these issues. And obviously that person living in the Bay Area and going to school in the Bay Area would never be exposed to trans people.

#Logic

That is some awesome logic. I feel I'm qualified to be a gynecologist because I've seen some pornos.

[Neveragain]

Yeah, I mean why would someone who did undergraduate and graduate work studying gender have any academic background in any of these issues. And obviously that person living in the Bay Area and going to school in the Bay Area would never be exposed to trans people.

#Logic

Then you have to admit that transgenders have a mental disorder or you are a crackpot, it can only be one of the two. You know this if you have this background.

[Astray]

Then you have to admit that transgenders have a mental disorder or you are a crackpot, it can only be one of the two. You know this if you have this background.

The mental gymnastics being performed are pretty great when it comes to acknowledging that it's a mental disorder while also claiming the person is mentally sound.

Olympic level.

[Tgo01]

The mental gymnastics being performed are pretty great when it comes to acknowledging that it's a mental disorder while also claiming the person is mentally sound.

Olympic level.

The best part is the left is always saying mentally unstable people shouldn't have access to firearms. I mean, how much much "mentally unstable" do you get than people who are highly suicidal and depressed? Suddenly it's okay for them to have access to firearms.

[Neveragain]

The mental gymnastics being performed are pretty great when it comes to acknowledging that it's a mental disorder while also claiming the person is mentally sound.

Olympic level.

It actually makes me sick that these people are being used as political pawns, because these people truly do believe they are not the sex that they really are. Delusion can be an extremely severe form of psychosis, some of the case studies I had to read about is mind blowing. I would not wish upon my worst enemy the nightmare it must be to live under such conditions, the military is no place for these folks.

[Wrathbringer]

Yeah, I mean why would someone who did undergraduate and graduate work studying gender have any academic background in any of these issues. And obviously that person living in the Bay Area and going to school in the Bay Area would never be exposed to trans people.

#Logic

I'm sorry you had to be around those people. It's obviously had an effect on you.

[Methais]

Ahh, you mean WHILE people are taking hormones. That's actually generally an exciting and positive time for people who are transitioning, at least among my friends who have transitioned. Mood swings can certainly be part of that, but that's also true of anyone who starts an anti-depressant, thyroid medication, hormone replacement for menopause, fertility drugs (as you noted), and honestly combat...and none of those require someone to leave the military. They're trained to keep themselves under control in incredibly stressful situations.

So on the list of groups we should be concerned about in regards to their ability to handle physical and emotional stress- I feel like this is the group is pretty close to the bottom.

And, if this were a real (rather than hypothetical) problem, they would have discovered that during the year long study they did on the subject or the last year-ish after we lifted the ban. Remember- all of this was carefully studied and reviewed. This isn't like desegregating the military or even allowing LGB people to serve openly- we don't have to speculate about what's going to happen.

We already know, and the answer is: nothing.

Studies indicate that you're stupid and full of shit.

More details on this study can be found here. (http://goatse.ch/)

[Astray]

It actually makes me sick that these people are being used as political pawns, because these people truly do believe they are not the sex that they really are. Delusion can be an extremely severe form of psychosis, some of the case studies I had to read about is mind blowing. I would not wish upon my worst enemy the nightmare it must be to live under such conditions, the military is no place for these folks.

It's all gross. These people have a voice and opinions but they get drowned out by the fucktards like T4F. I guess if you're fighting for them they don't really need a voice.

[Neveragain]

It's all gross. These people have a voice and opinions but they get drowned out by the fucktards like T4F. I guess if you're fighting for them they don't really need a voice.

Even worse is the same sort of assholes watched One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest in the 70's, took that as reality and pushed to shut down mental hospitals leaving these people in the streets. Their fucking idiots.

[Methais]

Even worse is the same sort of assholes watched One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest in the 70's, took that as reality and pushed to shut down mental hospitals leaving these people in the streets. Their fucking idiots.

Movies are real unicorns exist and there are 4873204 genders why can't you see that?

[Neveragain]

Movies are real unicorns exist and there are 4873204 genders why can't you see that?

There was a guy a buddy and I used to help out that suffered from manic depressive disorder, like a really bad case. We would stop in once or twice a month to check in on him to make sure he was taking care of himself and he had enough food in the apartment (it was fucking gross). Since he didn't have anyone there full time he would stop taking his medication and self medicate with crack cocaine. He eventually snapped, tried holding up a convenience store while completely naked and ended up getting shot dead by the police.

I guess that's why I can't see it.

P.S. I need to go smoke a bowl.

[Whirlin]

There was a guy a buddy and I used to help out that suffered from manic depressive disorder, like a really bad case. We would stop in once or twice a month to check in on him to make sure he was taking care of himself and he had enough food in the apartment (it was fucking gross). Since he didn't have anyone there full time he would stop taking his medication and self medicate with crack cocaine. He eventually snapped, tried holding up a convenience store while completely naked and ended up getting shot dead by the police.


Arguably, if you were in any capacity involved in my real life, visiting me even only once/twice a month, I'd rather get shot dead by the police too.

[Ashliana]

The mental gymnastics being performed are pretty great when it comes to acknowledging that it's a mental disorder while also claiming the person is mentally sound.

Olympic level.

Dysmorphia is a mental disorder. Only some trans people have dysmorphia and -- gasp -- the recommended treatment for it is gender transition.


The best part is the left is always saying mentally unstable people shouldn't have access to firearms. I mean, how much much "mentally unstable" do you get than people who are highly suicidal and depressed? Suddenly it's okay for them to have access to firearms.

"The left" (who?) says that unstable/dangerous people should face more scrutiny, not that they blanket shouldn't have access to fire arms. The military doesn't like unstable soldiers regardless of their gender congruence. And -- shocker -- trans people are individuals, not a mass of people who all share a magical, video game-like "Depression" trait.

Nobody buys your crocodile tears for the plight of trans people.


Actually, it did come from the military. They weighed in, and Trump responded accordingly. Sorry that doesn't fit your retarded narrative though.

"Actually," interviews with leaders show they were, quote, "blindsided (http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/07/26/trump-blindsides-pentagon-in-transgender-policy-shift/)" by it. Trump didn't do it at their behest. That "narrative" you're referring to is called "reality," my willfully deluded friend.

[Tgo01]

Dysmorphia is a mental disorder. Only some trans people have dysmorphia and -- gasp -- the recommended treatment for it is gender transition.



"The left" (who?) says that unstable/dangerous people should face more scrutiny, not that they blanket shouldn't have access to fire arms. The military doesn't like unstable soldiers regardless of their gender congruence. And -- shocker -- trans people are individuals, not a mass of people who all share a magical, video game-like "Depression" trait.

Nobody buys your crocodile tears for the plight of trans people.



"Actually," interviews with leaders show they were, quote, "blindsided (http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/07/26/trump-blindsides-pentagon-in-transgender-policy-shift/)" by it. Trump didn't do it at their behest. That "narrative" you're referring to is called "reality," my willfully deluded friend.

Just answer the question, Ashliana. Be a man for just once in your life. If Holder decided to go after pot smokers in Colorado anyway, do you think Obama would have been within his right to fire Holder, or would that have been an obstruction of justice as well?

Just admit you were wrong. Why can't you do that?

[time4fun]

The only reason why being transgender is still considered to be a mental disorder is that it's the onlly way to ensure insurance companies have to pay for reassignment surgery.

This has been a massive debate among the trans community and groups like the APA for years but is ultimately considered to be a necessary evil. The APA continues to advocate for it expressly because they want to ensure that the surgeries are covered, and they've been EXTREMELY clear that it's not because transgender people are in any way unstable or ill.

Also, don't be so crass as to pretend like people who are fighting against the re-instatement of the ban are somehow using trans people as "political footballs". It's illogical and just makes you a gross person to try to argue that people fighting FOR civil rights are somehow the problem- ESPECIALLY when you imply that being trans means you're mentally unstable.

Grow up. If you don't have a real argument, sit down and zip it.

[Ashliana]

Just answer the question, Ashliana. Be a man for just once in your life. If Holder decided to go after pot smokers in Colorado anyway, do you think Obama would have been within his right to fire Holder, or would that have been an obstruction of justice as well?

Just admit you were wrong. Why can't you do that?

You refusing to read the answer I gave you isn't the same thing as my not giving one, and you not understanding that your question in no way, shape or form has anything to do with Trump's obstruction of justice only reflects on you.

Try again.

[Gelston]

The only reason why being transgender is still considered to be a mental disorder is that it's the onlly way to ensure insurance companies have to pay for reassignment surgery.

This has been a massive debate among the trans community and groups like the APA for years but is ultimately considered to be a necessary evil. The APA continues to advocate for it expressly because they want to ensure that the surgeries are covered, and they've been EXTREMELY clear that it's not because transgender people are in any way unstable or ill.

Also, don't be so crass as to pretend like people who are fighting against the re-instatement of the ban are somehow using trans people as "political footballs". It's illogical and just makes you a gross person to try to argue that people fighting FOR civil rights are somehow the problem- ESPECIALLY when you imply that being trans means you're mentally unstable.

Grow up. If you don't have a real argument, sit down and zip it.

Wait, wait, wait... The Trans community is FINE with it being called a mental disorder so they can get that shit paid for by insurance? And that is okay? Stupid as fuck.

[Neveragain]

Arguably, if you were in any capacity involved in my real life, visiting me even only once/twice a month, I'd rather get shot dead by the police too.

You seem bitter, want to talk about it?

We could start with your burning need to be in a position of power and go from there.

[Tgo01]

The only reason why being transgender is still considered to be a mental disorder is that it's the onlly way to ensure insurance companies have to pay for reassignment surgery.

This has been a massive debate among the trans community and groups like the APA for years but is ultimately considered to be a necessary evil. The APA continues to advocate for it expressly because they want to ensure that the surgeries are covered, and they've been EXTREMELY clear that it's not because transgender people are in any way unstable or ill.

So...they're basically admitting they are defrauding insurance companies? Am I understanding this right?

[drauz]

The only reason why being transgender is still considered to be a mental disorder is that it's the onlly way to ensure insurance companies have to pay for reassignment surgery.

This has been a massive debate among the trans community and groups like the APA for years but is ultimately considered to be a necessary evil. The APA continues to advocate for it expressly because they want to ensure that the surgeries are covered, and they've been EXTREMELY clear that it's not because transgender people are in any way unstable or ill.

Also, don't be so crass as to pretend like people who are fighting against the re-instatement of the ban are somehow using trans people as "political footballs". It's illogical and just makes you a gross person to try to argue that people fighting FOR civil rights are somehow the problem- ESPECIALLY when you imply that being trans means you're mentally unstable.

Grow up. If you don't have a real argument, sit down and zip it.


Diagnosis:

The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) provides for one overarching diagnosis of gender dysphoria with separate specific criteria for children and for adolescents and adults.

In adolescents and adults gender dysphoria diagnosis involves a difference between one’s experienced/expressed gender and assigned gender, and significant distress or problems functioning.

The American Psychiatric Association seems to disagree with you.

[Tgo01]

The only reason why being transgender is still considered to be a mental disorder is that it's the onlly way to ensure insurance companies have to pay for reassignment surgery.

This has been a massive debate among the trans community and groups like the APA for years but is ultimately considered to be a necessary evil. The APA continues to advocate for it expressly because they want to ensure that the surgeries are covered, and they've been EXTREMELY clear that it's not because transgender people are in any way unstable or ill.

Also, don't be so crass as to pretend like people who are fighting against the re-instatement of the ban are somehow using trans people as "political footballs". It's illogical and just makes you a gross person to try to argue that people fighting FOR civil rights are somehow the problem- ESPECIALLY when you imply that being trans means you're mentally unstable.

Grow up. If you don't have a real argument, sit down and zip it.

Also if this isn't a classic example of eating your cake and having it too.

Transgenders: We demand our condition be labeled a mental disorder so we can defraud insurance companies to make them pay for our reassignment surgeries!
Military: Okay, but we can't accept you then because you have a mental disorder.
Transgenders: Well it's not REALLY a mental disorder, you transphobic bigot!

[time4fun]

The American Psychiatric Association seems to disagree with you.

Erm...how does that disagree with me?

Nothing in that line indicates "unstable" or "ill".

It says "your gender and body are mismatched, and it bothers you enough that we have a medical justification for fixing it".

[Parkbandit]

The American Psychiatric Association seems to disagree with you.

They don't have his/her experience. HE/SHE HAS FRIENDS WHO TRANSITIONED SO SHE IS THE AUTHORITY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

ETA: I almost assumed time4fun's gender!

[Tgo01]

Erm...how does that disagree with me?

Nothing in that line indicates "unstable" or "ill".

It says "your gender and body are mismatched, and it bothers you enough that we have a medical justification for fixing it".

I really do love the way you take a complex issue and water it down to "Your gender is mismatched and we made up a term for it so you can defraud insurance companies."

The APA also has this to say about gender Dysphoria:


People with gender dysphoria may often experience significant distress and/or problems functioning associated with this conflict between the way they feel and think of themselves (referred to as experienced or expressed gender) and their physical or assigned gender.

[drauz]

Erm...how does that disagree with me?

Nothing in that line indicates "unstable" or "ill".

It says "your gender and body are mismatched, and it bothers you enough that we have a medical justification for fixing it".


The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) provides for one overarching diagnosis of gender dysphoria with separate specific criteria for children and for adolescents and adults.

In adolescents and adults gender dysphoria diagnosis involves a difference between one’s experienced/expressed gender and assigned gender, and significant distress or problems functioning.

Its not a mental disorder, they just use the manual of mental disorders to diagnose it...

[Steve]

they should use their manual of mental disorders....you know...to diagnose this forums!

Eh?

EH?!

Amiright guys?!


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oShTJ90fC34

[time4fun]

Its not a mental disorder, they just use the manual of mental disorders to diagnose it...

Yeah that's the entire point of the conversation here. If it's not listed as a disorder, insurance companies don't have to cover the reassignment surgery. The APA advocates for it being a disorder for that reason alone.

But if you read the description of the disorder, they are VERY careful with the wording. Nothing about being trans makes you unstable or nuts, etc. The symptom is that you're distressed from being in the wrong body, and the solution is gender reassignment surgery.

This has been an ongoing debate between groups like the APA and the trans community for years. It's uncomfortable- advocates are stuck between pathologizing a group of people or denying them the procedures they need to be happy.

Groups like the APA have landed on the former for now, but they've taken great pains to be clear as to why.

[Tgo01]

But if you read the description of the disorder, they are VERY careful with the wording. Nothing about being trans makes you unstable or nuts, etc.

Do you realize how ableist you are sounding right now? The implication that having a mental disorder makes one "unstable or nuts"? Seriously?

You really are showing your true colors in this thread.

Also why you ignoring that I pointed this out already:


People with gender dysphoria may often experience significant distress and/or problems functioning associated with this conflict between the way they feel and think of themselves (referred to as experienced or expressed gender) and their physical or assigned gender.

Certainly doesn't make them "unstable or nuts", but it clearly states they often experience significant distress and problems functioning.

[drauz]

The APA advocates for it being a disorder for that reason alone.

Citation please.

[time4fun]

Citation please.

Fair request. Here's the history here:

Prior to 2012, being transgender (GID) was a disorder, but in 2012 the APA removed GID (http://www.msnbc.com/melissa-harris-perry/being-transgender-no-longer-mental-disorde)from the manual and replaced it with gender dysmorphia (which is about the distress one feels from being trans, not being trans itself). This meant that they still had a diagnosis that would require insurance companies to cover the treatment for the distress (gender reassignment surgery) without suggesting that being trans was an illness to be cured:


Transgender people will now be diagnosed with “gender dysphoria,” which means emotional stress related to gender identity.”Gender identity disorder” had been listed as a mental disorder since the third edition of the DSM more than 20 years ago.

In an interview with The Advocate, APA member Jack Drescher explained the new revision, saying, “All psychiatric diagnoses occur within a cultural context. We know there is a whole community of people out there who are not seeking medical attention and live between the two binary categories. We wanted to send the message that the therapist’s job isn’t to pathologize.”


The classification of “transgender” as a mental disorder has been used in the past to prove that being transgender is a psychological problem that can be treated. In one case, the Associated Press cited over the summer, a transgender woman was at risk of losing the children she fathered before her transition.

“The argument is that one criteria for terminating parental rights is if one parent has a severe, chronic mental illness that might be harmful to the child,” psychiatrist Dan Karasic told the AP. “A lawyer is apparently using that to argue that because the person is trans and has a diagnosis of GID, she should have her parental rights terminated.”

The APA acknowledges (http://www.apa.org/topics/lgbt/transgender.aspx)this tension between pathology and need for treatment on its website today:


According to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5), people who experience intense, persistent gender incongruence can be given the diagnosis of "gender dysphoria." Some contend that the diagnosis inappropriately pathologizes gender noncongruence and should be eliminated. Others argue that it is essential to retain the diagnosis to ensure access to care. The International Classification of Diseases (ICD) is under revision and there may be changes to its current classification of intense persistent gender incongruence as "gender identity disorder."

[drauz]

Fair request. Here's the history here:

Prior to 2012, being transgender (GID) was a disorder, but in 2012 the APA removed GID (http://www.msnbc.com/melissa-harris-perry/being-transgender-no-longer-mental-disorde)from the manual and replaced it with gender dysmorphia (which is about the distress one feels from being trans, not being trans itself). This meant that they still had a diagnosis that would require insurance companies to cover the treatment for the distress (gender reassignment surgery) without suggesting that being trans was an illness to be cured:





The APA acknowledges (http://www.apa.org/topics/lgbt/transgender.aspx)this tension between pathology and need for treatment on its website today:

That sounds like the exact opposite of them wanting it called a disorder. What am I missing?

[Astray]

That sounds like the exact opposite of them wanting it called a disorder. What am I missing?

Brain damage.

[time4fun]

That sounds like the exact opposite of them wanting it called a disorder. What am I missing?

So remember that the APA created the gender dysmorphia diagnosis. They could've just eiminated GID and left it at that. (And there was a lot of pressure by members of the trans community to do so) Instead, they created a disorder they could apply to trans people to force insurance companies to cover gender reassignment. (and they also got a lot of pressure from members of the trans community to do so)

So you're right that they clearly don't see being trans as a mental illness- they went out of their way to avoid it. BUT they still ensured that there was a DSM diagnosis for reasons related to treatment access instead of simply removing any notion that being trans is in any way, shape, or form pathological.

So when people (not you) in this thread suggest that it's illogical to argue that being trans isn't a sign of mental illness when there's a DSM diagnosis- they're just demonstrating that they don't understand the situation.

[~Rocktar~]

Yeah that's the entire point of the conversation here. If it's not listed as a disorder, insurance companies don't have to cover the reassignment surgery. The APA advocates for it being a disorder for that reason alone.

You are so full of shit that the whites of your eyes are deep brown and shit is pouring out from your ears.

Insurance companies don't give one rats ass about covering the surgery and treatment since a massive percentage "insurance" is not real insurance the way most people think. The insurance company is not in any way responsible for the expenses in self funded plans, the employer pays money into an account, the account pays the benefit to the provider, and the employer decides if they want to cover something. The insurance company is simply an administrative and customer contact company with the added benefit of shouldering the blame instead of the employer having to confess. If a self funded plan wants to pay for it, then big deal, it's covered. Like some plans cover alternative medicine and some don't. For those rare fully funded plans (the ones that work like people think insurance works and the insurance company is actually financially responsible) they can chose to cover it if they want and pay for the premium or not.

On self funded plans, there is little or no law requiring the coverage of anything anywhere. And the insurance company doesn't care because the expense is carried by the employer.

The APA wants everything covered so they can justify their existence and keep their members employed. It's one of the reasons that therapy and addiction recovery has such a low success rate. They work like drug companies but worse, they want to keep you coming back for decades because they have Audi's and BMW's to pay for.

[time4fun]

You are so full of shit that the whites of your eyes are deep brown and shit is pouring out from your ears.

Insurance companies don't give one rats ass about covering the surgery and treatment since a massive percentage "insurance" is not real insurance the way most people think. The insurance company is not in any way responsible for the expenses in self funded plans, the employer pays money into an account, the account pays the benefit to the provider, and the employer decides if they want to cover something. The insurance company is simply an administrative and customer contact company with the added benefit of shouldering the blame instead of the employer having to confess. If a self funded plan wants to pay for it, then big deal, it's covered. Like some plans cover alternative medicine and some don't. For those rare fully funded plans (the ones that work like people think insurance works and the insurance company is actually financially responsible) they can chose to cover it if they want and pay for the premium or not.

On self funded plans, there is little or no law requiring the coverage of anything anywhere. And the insurance company doesn't care because the expense is carried by the employer.

The APA wants everything covered so they can justify their existence and keep their members employed. It's one of the reasons that therapy and addiction recovery has such a low success rate. They work like drug companies but worse, they want to keep you coming back for decades because they have Audi's and BMW's to pay for.

Why do you insist on talking about things you don't understand?

Could you at least read the sources I've cited that clearly state that treatment access is a primary motivation for the diagnosis?

Without a diagnosis, the procedure is elective, not medical. And yes that does matter.

[time4fun]

Not that you'll read it (because it would ruin your high horse moment), but here you go:

From the APA: (http://www.apa.org/monitor/2013/04/transgender.aspx)


In 1980, the American Psychiatric Association added gender identity disorder to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM). While controversial, this was seen as a way to ensure that transgender people had access to care. In a nod to progress, the next DSM will replace "gender identity disorder" with "gender dysphoria" as a diagnosis.
The shift underscores that being transgender is not a disorder in itself: Treatment only is considered for transgender people who experience gender dysphoria — a feeling of intense distress that one's body is not consistent with the gender he or she feels they are, explains Walter Bockting, PhD, a clinical psychologist and co-director of the LGBT Health Initiative at Columbia University Medical Center.

Physicians usually require that any transgender client who wants a medical intervention be assessed first by a mental health provider. A letter may be requested stating that the client's mental health would improve from a gender transition. "Over the last two to three years, a number of medical associations have made statements about the medical necessity of transitional care for transgender people," says dickey. While still somewhat stigmatizing, a diagnosis of gender dysphoria ensures that more services for transgender people will be covered by health insurers.
.

And here's (http://www.wpath.org/site_page.cfm?pk_association_webpage_menu=1352&pk_association_webpage=3947)WPATH's more involved discussion of the connection between establishing medical necessity and insurance coverage.

[Tgo01]

Not that you'll read it (because it would ruin your high horse moment), but here you go:

From the APA: (http://www.apa.org/monitor/2013/04/transgender.aspx)



And here's (http://www.wpath.org/site_page.cfm?pk_association_webpage_menu=1352&pk_association_webpage=3947)WPATH's more involved discussion of the connection between establishing medical necessity and insurance coverage.

So...being transgender isn't a disorder...it's just the intense distress and difficulty functioning that is a disorder.

[~Rocktar~]

Why do you insist on talking about things you don't understand?

Could you at least read the sources I've cited that clearly state that treatment access is a primary motivation for the diagnosis?

Without a diagnosis, the procedure is elective, not medical. And yes that does matter.

Actually, elective surgery has a diagnosis too but hey, let's ignore reality. The term you are grasping for is "Medical Necessity" and that is why the APA made up this giant social experiment boondoggle. You can publish and say anything you want, that in no way guarantees that what you have said or published is your real motivation or is a fact. After all, Trump has said he is innocent and there was no collusion and stories have been written to that effect and yet, here you are still spewing that shit. Further, you are arguing that Transgenderism is a mental disorder and that sex reassignment surgery and medication is the treatment. Mental disorders are a well documented and accepted reason to ban people from military service.

Thank you for proving that Trump made the right decision.

By the way, have you helped your relative stop being a criminal and cleared up your criminal status yet?

[time4fun]

Actually, elective surgery has a diagnosis too but hey, let's ignore reality. The term you are grasping for is "Medical Necessity" and that is why the APA made up this giant social experiment boondoggle. You can publish and say anything you want, that in no way guarantees that what you have said or published is your real motivation or is a fact. After all, Trump has said he is innocent and there was no collusion and stories have been written to that effect and yet, here you are still spewing that shit. Further, you are arguing that Transgenderism is a mental disorder and that sex reassignment surgery and medication is the treatment. Mental disorders are a well documented and accepted reason to ban people from military service.

Thank you for proving that Trump made the right decision.

By the way, have you helped your relative stop being a criminal and cleared up your criminal status yet?

I'm not grasping for anything- I cited the phrase medically necessary several times. You just don't actually read what's posted, as usual.

And you are literally arguing with the APA about this right now- taking on their decades of scientific research (and their work to get insurance companies to cover reassignment surgery) with your own ridiculous, factless argument that actually veered into talking about Trump. You DID manage to acknowledge that the diagnosis was actually related to treatment access- to kudos for acknowledging that I was correct.

Ultimately though, much like your insane rant about immigration law- you're flat out wrong, incredibly offensive, and are embarrassing yourself.

[Fortybox]

I'm not grasping for anything- I cited the phrase medically necessary several times. You just don't actually read what's posted, as usual.

And you are literally arguing with the APA about this right now- taking on their decades of scientific research (and their work to get insurance companies to cover reassignment surgery) with your own ridiculous, factless argument that actually veered into talking about Trump. You DID manage to acknowledge that the diagnosis was actually related to treatment access- to kudos for acknowledging that I was correct.

Ultimately though, much like your insane rant about immigration law- you're flat out wrong, incredibly offensive, and are embarrassing yourself.

https://media2.giphy.com/media/vWwKj7kpPJFWE/giphy.gif

[hello]

I chuckled...

The Mooch: "I'm Not Steve Bannon, I'm Not Trying to Suck My Own Cock."

Stay classy Trump!

[~Rocktar~]

I'm not grasping for anything- I cited the phrase medically necessary several times. You just don't actually read what's posted, as usual.

And you are literally arguing with the APA about this right now- taking on their decades of scientific research (and their work to get insurance companies to cover reassignment surgery) with your own ridiculous, factless argument that actually veered into talking about Trump. You DID manage to acknowledge that the diagnosis was actually related to treatment access- to kudos for acknowledging that I was correct.

Ultimately though, much like your insane rant about immigration law- you're flat out wrong, incredibly offensive, and are embarrassing yourself.

Keep deflecting. The only embarrassment is you. And yes, I disagree with the APA because a large percentage of their members are ineffectual shysters and a huge amount of psychological "science" is guess work and modern versions of ancient Greek thought experiments combined with confirmation bias. Again, you can say and print what you want, that doesn't make it true and doesn't make it accurate.

Much like most all of your posts, you get called on your bullshit, you vomit forth with a diatribe about how you are so superior while being insulting and demeaning and yet, you still seem upset to have your gaslighting techniques called into question.

So, to sum up the argument, the APA says it's a disorder so they can get treatment paid for by someone else, you have little understand of how insurance actually works behind the scenes and now since it's a disorder and Trump has banned it, now they don't want it to be a disorder.

[Methais]

I like how time4twat ignored the whole part about defrauding insurance companies by pretending to have a mental disorder since she insists it's not a mental disorder.

Do they have a mental disorder or are they just a bunch of fraudulent thieves? I'm not seeing a third option.

[Tgo01]

Lady Gaga's Tweet to Trump about this:


@POTUS Sincerely, did you know of the group you singled out today, 45% of them ages (18 to 24) have attempted suicide already?

How do Democrats not understand they are making the case for the transgender ban?

"Hey, Bigot-in-Chief! Did you know almost half of transgenders have ALREADY tried to kill themselves, you fucking transphobic piece of shit! Now allow them in the military, put them in a dangerous and stressful situation, give them a fucking gun, and let them do their fucking jobs!"

[Ashliana]

"WHY won't somebody believe my sudden, new-found concern for the mental health of the trans community?!?" unironically shrieked Tgo01.

[Tgo01]

"WHY won't somebody believe my sudden, new-found concern for the mental health of the trans community?!?" unironically shrieked Tgo01.

Just answer the question, Ashliana. Be a man for just once in your life. If Holder decided to go after pot smokers in Colorado anyway, do you think Obama would have been within his right to fire Holder, or would that have been an obstruction of justice as well?

Just admit you were wrong. Why can't you do that?

[Ashliana]

Just answer the question, Ashliana. Be a man for just once in your life. If Holder decided to go after pot smokers in Colorado anyway, do you think Obama would have been within his right to fire Holder, or would that have been an obstruction of justice as well?

Just admit you were wrong. Why can't you do that?


You refusing to read the answer I gave you isn't the same thing as my not giving one, and you not understanding that your question in no way, shape or form has anything to do with Trump's obstruction of justice only reflects on you.

Try again.

[Parkbandit]

I served in Iraq in 2006. For the first five months I was on a 12 man firebase out in the middle of nowhere in the desert. Everyday was Groundhog Day. Wake up and do the same patrols, the same shifts, every single day. It was so damn hot. 150° in the gun trucks. Tracer fire would go overhead occasionally at night. IED's on the road were a daily threat. We got resupplied food every 8 days. The stress of being out there and doing the same job every single day eats away at you. The younger guys had problems with that overtime. Any tiny little personal issue they had suddenly became a mountain. And that shit came out on that fire base. And they snapped mentally. After stepping on each other's nuts living in the same can for five months, guys were at each other's throats. The stress made it worse. Guys would literally snap over a dear John letter. Their personal issues came out and they were instantly combat ineffective.


Now take someone confused about whether they are a man/woman. Take those psychological and emotional issues and put them in that environment. Take someone who is right off the bat not uniform or part of the same team. Give them special treatment because of their identity. Take that person, put them in that stressful war environment and watch what happens. It's a fucking ticking time bomb. You can't teach someone to be a fearless warrior in a fucking PowerPoint. You either have it or you don't. You can hack it or you can't. We had guys who couldn't. When faced with combat situations they crumbled. They had mental and emotional issues. They were a liability.


To be successful at war, you have to become a warrior mentally, physically, and emotionally. You can't fake it and go through the motions. In war if it comes down to kill or be killed, and you hesitate, you're dead. It's a simple as that. It's not a fucking video game. War is no place for people who are mentally, emotionally, or physically confused or in turmoil. You have your shit together, or you don't. And if you don't, you'll just get people needlessly killed.


Political correctness has absolutely no place in the military. Enough for now. This one armed veteran has a business to run. Unlike Iran, the country that took my arm, Obama didn't pay me millions.

-J.R. Salzman, an Iraq war veteran who lost his right arm below the elbow and sustained a traumatic brain injury during combat in 2006 via Twitter

[Tgo01]

I served in Iraq in 2006. For the first five months I was on a 12 man firebase out in the middle of nowhere in the desert. Everyday was Groundhog Day. Wake up and do the same patrols, the same shifts, every single day. It was so damn hot. 150° in the gun trucks. Tracer fire would go overhead occasionally at night. IED's on the road were a daily threat. We got resupplied food every 8 days. The stress of being out there and doing the same job every single day eats away at you. The younger guys had problems with that overtime. Any tiny little personal issue they had suddenly became a mountain. And that shit came out on that fire base. And they snapped mentally. After stepping on each other's nuts living in the same can for five months, guys were at each other's throats. The stress made it worse. Guys would literally snap over a dear John letter. Their personal issues came out and they were instantly combat ineffective.


Now take someone confused about whether they are a man/woman. Take those psychological and emotional issues and put them in that environment. Take someone who is right off the bat not uniform or part of the same team. Give them special treatment because of their identity. Take that person, put them in that stressful war environment and watch what happens. It's a fucking ticking time bomb. You can't teach someone to be a fearless warrior in a fucking PowerPoint. You either have it or you don't. You can hack it or you can't. We had guys who couldn't. When faced with combat situations they crumbled. They had mental and emotional issues. They were a liability.


To be successful at war, you have to become a warrior mentally, physically, and emotionally. You can't fake it and go through the motions. In war if it comes down to kill or be killed, and you hesitate, you're dead. It's a simple as that. It's not a fucking video game. War is no place for people who are mentally, emotionally, or physically confused or in turmoil. You have your shit together, or you don't. And if you don't, you'll just get people needlessly killed.


Political correctness has absolutely no place in the military. Enough for now. This one armed veteran has a business to run. Unlike Iran, the country that took my arm, Obama didn't pay me millions.

-J.R. Salzman, an Iraq war veteran who lost his right arm below the elbow and sustained a traumatic brain injury during combat in 2006 via Twitter

He sounds like a transphobe. Why wouldn't we want a group of people, of which half have already tried to kill themselves, into the military?

[Parkbandit]

He sounds like a transphobe. Why wouldn't we want a group of people, of which half have already tried to kill themselves, into the military?

I never served.. so I'll just take his word for it.

Now, time4fun did date someone from the Navy for 4 years.. so clearly she knows better than this guy. Let's wait for him/her to weigh in.

[Tgo01]

Now, time4fun did date someone from the Navy for 4 years.. so clearly she knows better than this guy. Let's wait for him/her to weigh in.

Plus she has several friends who have already completed their transition and she even gone as far as to imply this makes her an expert on transgender people.

Between her Navy experience and her transgender expertise she really is the PC expert on this discussion.

[Parkbandit]

Plus she has several friends who have already completed their transition and she even gone as far as to imply this makes her an expert on transgender people.

Between her Navy experience and her transgender expertise she really is the PC expert on this discussion.

So.. a typical political thread with him/her.

[Jhynnifer]

Yeah that's the entire point of the conversation here. If it's not listed as a disorder, insurance companies don't have to cover the reassignment surgery. The APA advocates for it being a disorder for that reason alone.

But if you read the description of the disorder, they are VERY careful with the wording. Nothing about being trans makes you unstable or nuts, etc. The symptom is that you're distressed from being in the wrong body, and the solution is gender reassignment surgery.

This has been an ongoing debate between groups like the APA and the trans community for years. It's uncomfortable- advocates are stuck between pathologizing a group of people or denying them the procedures they need to be happy.

Groups like the APA have landed on the former for now, but they've taken great pains to be clear as to why.


I kind of have to agree with some folks here. The way you're talking about it makes this look like a "have your cake and eat it too" kind of situation. You can't call it a mental disorder for the sake of getting gender reassignment surgery paid for by insurance then turn around and say they should be allowed in combat because it's only technically a mental disorder.

We're not even talking about the ban anymore, but your argument which feels like it's hurting the cause more than helping at this point. Which is unfortunate.

[Methais]

Plus she has several friends who have already completed their transition and she even gone as far as to imply this makes her an expert on transgender people.

Between her Navy experience and her transgender expertise she really is the PC expert on this discussion.

Don't forget she also plays a male dwarf that pretends to be a female pretending to be a male in a 30 year old medieval text game. Kind of like the stoning scene on Monty Python's Life of Brian, but with maximum cringe in place of being funny.

Is there no limit to the boundaries of her expertise?

[Wrathbringer]

Don't forget she plays a male dwarf that pretends to be a female pretending to be a male in a 30 year old medieval text game.

Is there no limit to the boundaries of her expertise?

It's a dwarf? Lol that makes it even more funny.

[Methais]

We're not even talking about the ban anymore, but your argument which feels like it's hurting the cause more than helping at this point. Which is unfortunate.

That's the case with 99.999999% of the arguments she makes regarding anything. And she's completely oblivious to her own massive hypocrisy.

So is it a mental disorder or are they defrauding the insurance system? Because it can't be both. Which is probably why she keeps avoiding responding directly to it.

[Latrinsorm]

I kind of have to agree with some folks here. The way you're talking about it makes this look like a "have your cake and eat it too" kind of situation. You can't call it a mental disorder for the sake of getting gender reassignment surgery paid for by insurance then turn around and say they should be allowed in combat because it's only technically a mental disorder. We're not even talking about the ban anymore, but your argument which feels like it's hurting the cause more than helping at this point. Which is unfortunate.There are two important distinctions to make here: not all military are combat troops, and not all trans people have gender dysmorphia.

As such, the President tweeting that people who are trans would not be allowed to serve in the military is very different from tweeting that people with gender dysmorphia would not be allowed to serve in combat.

It's not having one's cake and eating it too, it's pointing out bright line distinctions that (crucially) pre-date the tweets. Distinguishing between trans and gender dysmorphia didn't just suddenly happen after the President sent these tweets. It happened literally years ago.

[time4fun]

I kind of have to agree with some folks here. The way you're talking about it makes this look like a "have your cake and eat it too" kind of situation. You can't call it a mental disorder for the sake of getting gender reassignment surgery paid for by insurance then turn around and say they should be allowed in combat because it's only technically a mental disorder.

We're not even talking about the ban anymore, but your argument which feels like it's hurting the cause more than helping at this point. Which is unfortunate.

1) So when you say "have your cake and eat it too", I assume you mean "Not be the victim of institutionalized discrimination and also be given access to a procedure you need?".

Is that really asking so much for someone who is putting their life on the line for their country? The APA and the US Military don't seem to think so.

2) What I'll counter here is- you can't decide that gender dysmorphia is a sign of being mentally unstable and unfit to serve when the people who made the diagnosis intentionally created it to avoid giving that exact impression (they are the experts, after all) AND when the military itself has backed that stance. Likewise, you can't argue that merely having a diagnosis that lives in the DSM automatically disqualifies you from service when there are other medical and psychological diagnoses that don't disqualify you or which are allowable upon a waiver.

3) Not all trans people are pre-op upon enlistment, and not all trans people intend to have gender reassignment surgery.

What's not helping the argument is ignoring the nuance of the situation for simpler, inaccurate, arguments.


Biggest takeaway: If the US Military has already said that there is no reason to disqualify trans people from serving, then no one here should be arguing otherwise. They've been serving for almost a year with no problems- which means this conversation isn't really about the impact on combat readiness.

[Wrathbringer]

1) So when you say "have your cake and eat it too", I assume you mean "Not be the victim of institutionalized discrimination and also be given access to a procedure you need?".

Is that really asking so much?

2) What I'll counter here is- you can't decide that gender dysmorphia is a sign of being mentally unstable and unfit to serve when the people who made the diagnosis intentionally made it to be extremely clear that wasn't the case AND when the military itself has backed that. Likewise, you can't argue that merely having a diagnosis that lives in the DSM automatically disqualifies you from service when there are other medical and psychological diagnoses that don't disqualify you or which are allowable upon a waiver.

3) Not all trans people are pre-op upon enlistment, and not all trans people intend to have gender reassignment surgery.

What's not helping the argument is ignoring the nuance of the situation for simpler, inaccurate, arguments.


Biggest takeaway: If the US Military has already said that there is no reason to disqualify trans people from serving, then no one here should be arguing otherwise.

You lost get over it.

[rolfard]

You lost get over it.

Blame Obama

[Ashliana]

You lost get over it.

FYI, you lost too -- more so. You're just too stupid to see it.

[Tgo01]

"Not be the victim of institutionalized discrimination

You just said that, didn't you?

Let me guess, white privilege exists too and there is institutionalized racism against blacks, right?

[Parkbandit]

http://dailysignal.com/2017/07/26/why-forcing-the-military-to-pay-for-sex-changes-would-be-disastrous/

[Gelston]

https://scontent-dft4-3.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/20479962_10203833106225496_8642611522845777562_n.j pg?oh=bd8fc07b1df3bcf67aca42f546642bb3&oe=59FFF7CC

[Methais]

https://i.imgur.com/Kegw5sD.jpg

[Crash187]

Let's just fix this shit right here. You were born with a dick? I don't give a shit what you think you are, you're a guy. Born with a pussy? I don't give a shit what you think you are, you're a woman. No amount of hormones, surgery, or anything else will change that. Remember those XY and XX chromosomes we all learned about around the age of 13-15? Yeah that's proven science (something all the hey we need to hug everybody say they support). So tell me how again this isn't a mental illness?

[time4fun]

Let's just fix this shit right here. You were born with a dick? I don't give a shit what you think you are, you're a guy. Born with a pussy? I don't give a shit what you think you are, you're a woman. No amount of hormones, surgery, or anything else will change that. Remember those XY and XX chromosomes we all learned about around the age of 13-15? Yeah that's proven science (something all the hey we need to hug everybody say they support). So tell me how again this isn't a mental illness?

There are five chromosomal variations of X and Y in humans not two. (Technically more, but I don't want your head to explode)

And human societies have had between 2-5 genders, as documented by anthropologists.

I guess your 13 year old understanding of gender and sex in humans isn't accurate.

Shocking.

[Crash187]

There are five chromosomal variations of X and Y in humans not two.

I guess your 13 year old understanding of gender and sex in humans isn't accurate.

Shocking.

Ok, take out the chromosomes. You have a pussy? You're a female. You have a dick? You're a male. You have both? decide what you want to be and stick with it. Anything other than 3 options is a mental illness

[Methais]

And human societies have had between 2-5 genders, as documented by anthropologists

Nobody is making the claim that mental illness is something new.

I bet you think the Earth is flat too.

[Wrathbringer]

Let's just fix this shit right here. You were born with a dick? I don't give a shit what you think you are, you're a guy. Born with a pussy? I don't give a shit what you think you are, you're a woman. No amount of hormones, surgery, or anything else will change that. Remember those XY and XX chromosomes we all learned about around the age of 13-15? Yeah that's proven science (something all the hey we need to hug everybody say they support). So tell me how again this isn't a mental illness?

This is correct.

[Wrathbringer]

There are five chromosomal variations of X and Y in humans not two. (Technically more, but I don't want your head to explode)

And human societies have had between 2-5 genders, as documented by anthropologists.

I guess your 13 year old understanding of gender and sex in humans isn't accurate.

Shocking.

This is retarded.

[Crash187]

This is retarded.

I was attempting to be nice and not go all hateful.

[Crash187]

There are five chromosomal variations of X and Y in humans not two. (Technically more, but I don't want your head to explode)

And human societies have had between 2-5 genders, as documented by anthropologists.

I guess your 13 year old understanding of gender and sex in humans isn't accurate.

Shocking.

No actually there's not. There's XXYY, Xyy, etc and imagine that, they all have physical or mental disabilities. Keep preaching though.

[Stumplicker]

There are five chromosomal variations of X and Y in humans not two. (Technically more, but I don't want your head to explode)

And human societies have had between 2-5 genders, as documented by anthropologists.

I guess your 13 year old understanding of gender and sex in humans isn't accurate.

Shocking.

I understand what you're referencing anthropologically, but I want to say - Don't drag anthropology into this or I'm going to come into this particular argument against you. You know I'm generally on the trans rights side of things on issues, as I am on the original point of the thread, but you're muddling anthropological musings on social construction with a dimorphic biological system to try to make a point, and i'm not okay with that.

[BigWorm]

https://scontent-dft4-3.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/20479962_10203833106225496_8642611522845777562_n.j pg?oh=bd8fc07b1df3bcf67aca42f546642bb3&oe=59FFF7CC

Sincere question: what is the criticism of Kristen Beck based on? Afaik she was decorated SEAL who earned a bronze star and purple heart during her 20 years of service. Seems like someone who would be very difficult to replace. I honestly don't understand how banning her improves our military.

[Neveragain]

There are five chromosomal variations of X and Y in humans not two. (Technically more, but I don't want your head to explode)

And human societies have had between 2-5 genders, as documented by anthropologists.

I guess your 13 year old understanding of gender and sex in humans isn't accurate.

Shocking.

X-trisomy, sex chromosome disorder of human females, in which three X chromosomes are present, rather than the normal pair. More common than Turner’s syndrome, where only one X chromosome is present, X-trisomy usually remains undetected because affected individuals appear normal, experience puberty, and are usually fertile. Statistical studies suggest a slightly increased frequency of mental disturbance, retardation, or both.

XYY-trisomy, relatively common human sex chromosome anomaly in which a male has two Y chromosomes rather than one. It occurs in 1 in 500–1,000 live male births, and individuals with the anomaly are often characterized by tallness and severe acne and sometimes by skeletal malformations and mental deficiency. It has been suggested that the presence of an extra Y chromosome in an individual may cause him to be more aggressive and prone to criminal behaviour, a condition called the “supermale” syndrome. Studies of prison populations have tended to confirm this hypothesis; but subsequent studies of the general population, especially those in which affected individuals were observed from early childhood over a long period of time, have cast serious doubt on the validity of linking the chromosomal anomaly directly to behavioral abnormalities.

Just stop, you're a crackpot. No legitimate psychologist would recommend these folks going through basic training.

[Crash187]

Sincere question: what is the criticism of Kristen Beck based on? Afaik she was decorated SEAL who earned a bronze star and purple heart during her 20 years of service. Seems like someone who would be very difficult to replace. I honestly don't understand how banning her improves our military.

Hell, I don't know, maybe he/she waiting until after his/her time in the military was concluded to come out with it? They didn't provide a distraction. Silly us for not thinking about it before you call on someone who hid it until their job was done. Honestly, that's the problem I have with today's society. Everyone wants to make a statement. STFU do your job and no one will complain. They're just too many that want the limelight for being special.

I'm missing a finger and most of the use of my left hand but do you see me looking for special treatment. I believe one of my first posts was I came back to GS for a specific reason but I'd either get sympathy or laughed at, neither of which I want.

[Tgo01]

There are five chromosomal variations of X and Y in humans not two. (Technically more, but I don't want your head to explode)

And human societies have had between 2-5 genders, as documented by anthropologists.

I guess your 13 year old understanding of gender and sex in humans isn't accurate.

Shocking.

What exactly are you referring to? Because I can promise you are either making this shit up or you don't understand what you are talking about.

[Stumplicker]

What exactly are you referring to? Because I can promise you are either making this shit up or you don't understand what you are talking about.

The anthropological part of it is based in truth but it's a non-argument to the point she's trying to make. She's talking about the anthropological idea that genders and their roles are a result of social construction and have been given different or expanded definitions and then reified in isolated sociocultural groups such as some South American and African Tribes. It's however a non argument because the culture this debate exists in isn't an isolated tribe with an expanded social assumption of gender roles, and the primary given arguments against this thread are biological and not social.

No idea on the rest.

[Methais]

There are five chromosomal variations of X and Y in humans not two. (Technically more, but I don't want your head to explode)

And human societies have had between 2-5 genders, as documented by anthropologists.

I guess your 13 year old understanding of gender and sex in humans isn't accurate.

Shocking.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=funX1EoWipQ

[Neveragain]

The anthropological part of it is based in truth but it's a non-argument to the point she's trying to make. She's talking about the anthropological idea that genders and their roles are a result of social construction and have been given different or expanded definitions when examined in isolated sociocultural groups such as some South American and African Tribes. It's however a non argument because the culture this debate exists in isn't an isolated tribe with an expanded social assumption of gender roles, and the primary given arguments against this thread are biological and not social.

No idea on the rest.

There are sociologist that suggest that these changes in "gender roles" can be used as a measure of the social state of a society. These changes can be seen through artwork, design, fashion, etc. of the period. More times than not when these aspects of society become more "flamboyant" they trend towards the fall of a society.

[Methais]

There are sociologist that suggest that these changes in "gender roles" can be used as a measure of the social state of a society. These changes can be seen through artwork, design, fashion, etc. of the period. More times than not when these aspects of society become more "flamboyant" they trend towards the fall of a society.

So basically we're all about to die...


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SEDhbjkknWo

[Crash187]

Maybe, this will knock some sense into time4fun (doubtful but I'll give it a go), The constitution guarantees the right to the pursuit of happiness. If pursuing it means you want to act or look like the opposite sex, that's all well and good. Should the rest of the people pay for it? Not so much. That's why, personally I think, transgenders should not be allowed in the military in any capacity. This country already has too many debts to pay. Why should we pay because someone is confused as all get out?

[Methais]

Maybe, this will knock some sense into time4fun (doubtful but I'll give it a go), The constitution guarantees the right to the pursuit of happiness. If pursuing it means you want to act or look like the opposite sex, that's all well and good. Should the rest of the people pay for it? Not so much. That's why, personally I think, transgenders should not be allowed in the military in any capacity. This country already has too many debts to pay. Why should we pay because someone is confused as all get out?

http://burkschapel.com/images/stories/Burks%20Chapel%20Images/UMC%20YouAreInvited_thumb_400.jpg

http://forum.gsplayers.com/showthread.php?110523-Hate-Speech-Thread

http://cdn.publishyourarticles.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/invitation.jpg

[Stumplicker]

There are sociologist that suggest that these changes in "gender roles" can be used as a measure of the social state of a society. These changes can be seen through artwork, design, fashion, etc. of the period. More times than not when these aspects of society become more "flamboyant" they trend towards the fall of a society.

If you want to use anthropological findings to make a point which I suspect is something like "fags are ruining America" based on your persona here, I'm going to make you at least work for it. So before I agree, I'll need you to expand on the following:

1. Tell me exactly how you feel that the linguistic reification of an expanded gender identity in isolated South American tribes ties into the cultural downfall you're referencing - and I'll even help you a bit and say that certain aspects of Western Roman civilization may sync up with an idea like that, though I've never heard or read anyone's work that references it as a causality. To my knowledge, they're completely different things.

2. Tell me whose work exactly you're referencing.

[Latrinsorm]

Maybe, this will knock some sense into time4fun (doubtful but I'll give it a go), The constitution guarantees the right to the pursuit of happiness. If pursuing it means you want to act or look like the opposite sex, that's all well and good. Should the rest of the people pay for it? Not so much. That's why, personally I think, transgenders should not be allowed in the military in any capacity. This country already has too many debts to pay. Why should we pay because someone is confused as all get out?There is nothing about being transgender that causes you to pay anything.

[Crash187]

There is nothing about being transgender that causes you to pay anything.
Do you purposely disregard the subject and lump everyone into the same category? I'm speaking of trans people in the military and since the healthcare of trans in the military is paid for by my taxes to the government, yes it does causes me to pay for things. My, kids, grand kids, etc will be paying for it too since we're so in debt. I know this might be a tough concept for you to understand but all that money doesn't come from no where.

[Tgo01]

Do you purposely disregard the subject and lump everyone into the same category? I'm speaking of trans people in the military and since the healthcare of trans in the military is paid for by my taxes to the government, yes it does causes me to pay for things. My, kids, grand kids, etc will be paying for it too since we're so in debt. I know this might be a tough concept for you to understand but all that money doesn't come from no where.

Welcome to the politics folder!

Latrinsorm is the master of deflection and feigning ignorance.

time4fun is, well, you've already seen her handiwork.

ClydeR is really a Democrat who pretends to be a Republican, although lately he has been faltering on this last point and stops pretending altogether. He fancies himself an old school Stephen Colbert.

It's dangerous to go alone!

[Methais]

Welcome to the politics folder!

Latrinsorm is the master of deflection and feigning ignorance.

time4fun is, well, you've already seen her handiwork.

ClydeR is really a Democrat who pretends to be a Republican, although lately he has been faltering on this last point and stops pretending altogether. He fancies himself an old school Stephen Colbert.

It's dangerous to go alone!

And on Tuesdays Backlash says extra stupid shit because he's wasted by 8am.

[Neveragain]

If you want to use anthropological findings to make a point which I suspect is something like "fags are ruining America" based on your persona here, I'm going to make you at least work for it. So before I agree, I'll need you to expand on the following:

1. Tell me exactly how you feel that the linguistic reification of an expanded gender identity in isolated South American tribes ties into the cultural downfall you're referencing - and I'll even help you a bit and say that certain aspects of Western Roman civilization may sync up with an idea like that, though I've never heard or read anyone's work that references it as a causality. To my knowledge, they're completely different things.

2. Tell me whose work exactly you're referencing.

I'm not at all saying "fags are ruining society" nor am I trying to make any religious comparisons. It's fairly easy to look through history and see these trends Egypt, Rome, The American and French revolutionary period etc. You can find that the more excessive living among the wealthy is towards the collapse of those societies. It's pretty easy to think it through...

With an isolated tribe there would be heavy inbreeding causing all kinds of genetic rifts, isolated religion and I would imagine it being a South American tribe there has probably been plenty of drug use that's a part of the culture. I would also think that the daily action of that society would be more focused towards things of need rather than "pleasing the senses".

Camille Paglia:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I8BRdwgPChQ

[Latrinsorm]

Do you purposely disregard the subject and lump everyone into the same category? I'm speaking of trans people in the military and since the healthcare of trans in the military is paid for by my taxes to the government, yes it does causes me to pay for things. My, kids, grand kids, etc will be paying for it too since we're so in debt. I know this might be a tough concept for you to understand but all that money doesn't come from no where.There is nothing about being transgender that causes anybody to pay anything.

You have been told a lie, and you believed it. That's okay. It happens.

You can choose to stop believing the lie, to stop being a puppet for people who laugh at you behind your back.

Or you can keep parroting the lie.

Your call.

[Crash187]

There is nothing about being transgender that causes anybody to pay anything.

You have been told a lie, and you believed it. That's okay. It happens.

You can choose to stop believing the lie, to stop being a puppet for people who laugh at you behind your back.

Or you can keep parroting the lie.

Your call.

So let me get this straight? I pay taxes and my taxes go to all forms of the government including Healthcare for veterans. Yet somehow I'm not paying with my taxes for said trans veterans? Are you high or just dumb? I'm having a hard distinguishing which at this point. Hell I don't agree with their assumption they are anything but what they were born as, so technically I'm still paying for their crazy ass since they are a vet. I pretty much initially said that I don't believe trans should be in the military since so many people these days want to make a statement of "Oh look at me". You want to be trans in the military? Keep your pie hole shut until afterwards. That's just how the US is these days. "I'm special you should blow me or lick my cooter or lick my ass(if I'm neither male or fermale." STFU do what you VOLUNTEERED for and do what ever it is you think you have to do after military service.

Hope that cleared it up for you Latrine. You're name is too close to Latrine storm for me not to think of you after as something I drop a turd in after a night of heavy drinking and cause. A shit storm in the latrine.

[Wrathbringer]

And on Tuesdays Backlash says extra stupid shit because he's wasted by 8am.

Back never fails to deliver, that's for sure.

[Fortybox]

Um...time4fun just googles up garbage. I'm sure he is doing google fu right now for a response back.

The internet has created so many know-it-alls. Time to ban time4fun's internet connection.

[Back]

So let me get this straight? I pay taxes and my taxes go to all forms of the government including Healthcare for veterans. Yet somehow I'm not paying with my taxes for said trans veterans? Are you high or just dumb? I'm having a hard distinguishing which at this point. Hell I don't agree with their assumption they are anything but what they were born as, so technically I'm still paying for their crazy ass since they are a vet. I pretty much initially said that I don't believe trans should be in the military since so many people these days want to make a statement of "Oh look at me". You want to be trans in the military? Keep your pie hole shut until afterwards. That's just how the US is these days. "I'm special you should blow me or lick my cooter or lick my ass(if I'm neither male or fermale." STFU do what you VOLUNTEERED for and do what ever it is you think you have to do after military service.

Hope that cleared it up for you Latrine. You're name is too close to Latrine storm for me not to think of you after as something I drop a turd in after a night of heavy drinking and cause. A shit storm in the latrine.

It would be nice if we could all decide where the taxes we paid went. But the flaw with that is some things would be over inflated while other things would get neglected. We have a government of the people who decides how this money is spent equitably and for the betterment of everyone as a whole ideologically. We voted for people to handle that responsibility for us. It's not perfect. Nothing with people ever is. But we got it pretty damn good here in this country so it appears to be working pretty well.

Not sure why this particular issue of transgender bothers you so much that you would resort to trying to smear the character of the individual you are responding to. I'm certain we could find plenty of things your tax dollars pay for that you might disapprove of even more strongly.

[Latrinsorm]

So let me get this straight? I pay taxes and my taxes go to all forms of the government including Healthcare for veterans. Yet somehow I'm not paying with my taxes for said trans veterans?Correct. Because there are no costs (healthcare or otherwise) necessarily associated with trans people (veterans or otherwise).

[Gelston]

Sincere question: what is the criticism of Kristen Beck based on? Afaik she was decorated SEAL who earned a bronze star and purple heart during her 20 years of service. Seems like someone who would be very difficult to replace. I honestly don't understand how banning her improves our military.

He waited until after he was out to do it, which is fine with me, to be honest. I think his effectiveness if he had done it WHILE IN would have been lower though.

[~Rocktar~]

Correct. Because there are no costs (healthcare or otherwise) necessarily associated with trans people (veterans or otherwise).

If there is no cost, why did the APA label it a disorder to get insurance companies pay for treatment for it?

[time4fun]

If there is no cost, why did the APA label it a disorder to get insurance companies pay for treatment for it?

Not everyone undergoes gender reassignment surgery- hence the word "necessarily".

[Stumplicker]

I'm not at all saying "fags are ruining society" nor am I trying to make any religious comparisons. It's fairly easy to look through history and see these trends Egypt, Rome, The American and French revolutionary period etc. You can find that the more excessive living among the wealthy is towards the collapse of those societies. It's pretty easy to think it through...

With an isolated tribe there would be heavy inbreeding causing all kinds of genetic rifts, isolated religion and I would imagine it being a South American tribe there has probably been plenty of drug use that's a part of the culture. I would also think that the daily action of that society would be more focused towards things of need rather than "pleasing the senses".

Camille Paglia:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I8BRdwgPChQ

Oh give me a break. Could you not find a Klan wizard to illustrate the point you were trying to make? That's Chamille Paglia. She's not a sociologist. She's an art teacher from Philly who gained notoriety by taking the "feminist" standpoint of saying that women who dress provocatively are asking to be raped.

And I fail to find your connection between "excessive living of the wealthy" and "transgender rights". As far as I know, transgender people are generally not considered the wealthy elite, but do generally tend to be ostracized from society and have horrible quality of living. If you're equating "lavish living" with "income inequality and caste systems", then sure, that generally does lead to overthrowing the wealthy elite historically, but it has nothing to do with transgender people. Blaming transgender persons for the overthrow of France or Rome completely ignores the underlying issues that cause the downfall of a society and instead focuses on a statistic that may or may not exist. It's like blaming a starving peasant because Marie Antoinette wanted to get her vagina bedazzled with diamonds. I've seen no paper suggesting that the number of transexual persons increases as a society heads towards revolution or ruin, because such a paper doesn't exist, because that notion is insane.

But if you're taking your anthropological "evidence" from an art teacher in Philly, I'm not going to spend a lot of time trying to convince you otherwise. It doesn't seem worthwhile.

[Methais]

Not everyone undergoes gender reassignment surgery- hence the word "necessarily".

Oh gee that totally makes it a non-existent problem then. Thread's over guy's time4genderreassignmentsurgery is the smartest one here.

[Neveragain]

Oh give me a break. Could you not find a Klan wizard to illustrate the point you were trying to make? That's Chamille Paglia. She's not a sociologist. She's an art teacher from Philly who gained notoriety by taking the "feminist" standpoint of saying that women who dress provocatively are asking to be raped.

And I fail to find your connection between "excessive living of the wealthy" and "transgender rights". As far as I know, transgender people are generally not considered the wealthy elite, but do generally tend to be ostracized from society and have horrible quality of living. If you're equating "lavish living" with "income inequality and caste systems", then sure, that generally does lead to overthrowing the wealthy elite historically, but it has nothing to do with transgender people. Blaming transgender persons for the overthrow of France or Rome completely ignores the underlying issues that cause the downfall of a society and instead focuses on a statistic that may or may not exist. It's like blaming a starving peasant because Marie Antoinette wanted to get her vagina bedazzled with diamonds. I've seen no paper suggesting that the number of transexual persons increases as a society heads towards revolution or ruin, because such a paper doesn't exist, because that notion is insane.

But if you're taking your anthropological "evidence" from an art teacher in Philly, I'm not going to spend a lot of time trying to convince you otherwise. It doesn't seem worthwhile.

Who's blaming anyone?

I get it, you have no argument so you fall back to "you're a NAZI!" why am I not surprised?


In 2005, Paglia was ranked No. 20 on a Prospect/Foreign Policy poll of the world's top 100 public intellectuals.[4]

FFS she has a PhD from Yale.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bGH2d1jBJu8

[Neveragain]

If there is no cost, why did the APA label it a disorder to get insurance companies pay for treatment for it?

It's not monetary cost that we should be talking about, it's about risking human lives for a social experiment.

[Stumplicker]

Who's blaming anyone?

I get it, you have no argument so you fall back to "you're a NAZI!" why am I not surprised?


Quote me the part where I said anything about Nazis please. I'll wait.



FFS she has a PhD from Yale.


She has a PhD in English, and has been teaching at an Art College that doesn't even have an Anthropology program for the past 30 years. I wouldn't take a medical diagnosis from her any more than I would take an anthropological opinion without some sort of study or corroborating evidence. Would you trust Bill Cosby if he told you that you could mark the downfall of a civilization by "trans mania" without any information to back up that claim? He has a PhD too, and arguably one more appropriate to make such a statement without being questioned than an Art Teacher.

If Stephen Hawking came to you and told you that you had cancer because a crystal he wears was giving off a weird chakra, would you take him at his word? Or would you maybe want to know what makes him think that, since he's an astrophysicist and not a MD. Or at very least might you want a second opinion from someone trained in that field of study?

[Neveragain]

Quote me the part where I said anything about Nazis please. I'll wait.


Could you not find a Klan wizard to illustrate the point you were trying to make? ~ Wesley

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camille_Paglia

She's been writing books and researching these topics for decades.

I can spend hours linking information that agrees with her.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Societal_collapse

Our society is in collapse, every sign points at it. Dudes in dresses is just a small part of all the red flags.

[Gelston]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camille_Paglia

She's been writing books and researching these topics for decades.

I can spend hours linking information that agrees with her.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Societal_collapse

Our society is in collapse, every sign points at it. Dudes in dresses is just a small part of all the red flags.

While the Ku Klux Klan is often associated with the Neo-Nazi movement and share many of the same ideals, they are not the same thing. Learn your hate groups, n00b.

[Ashliana]

Isn't it funny how a supermajority of Americans (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-military-transgender-poll-idUSKBN1AD2BL) support trans people in the military, but the regular board neocons seem to have a solidly uniform opinion? What could it be?!

http://i.imgur.com/Q0AIDAD.png

Ooh! I'd like to buy a letter.

Regardless of whether you think they should use different pronouns and wear different clothes, regardless of whether you think insurance should pay for their healthcare costs, you have to be a pretty shitty person to tell someone "you're not even good enough to die fighting for me."

[Wrathbringer]

While the Ku Klux Klan is often associated with the Neo-Nazi movement and share many of the same ideals, they are not the same thing. Learn your hate groups, n00b.

time4dung will be along any moment to inform us that she is currently grand wizard of 4 klans and knows hate groups better than we do.

[Wrathbringer]

Isn't it funny how a supermajority of Americans (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-military-transgender-poll-idUSKBN1AD2BL) support trans people in the military, but the regular board neocons seem to have a solidly uniform opinion? What could it be?!

http://i.imgur.com/Q0AIDAD.png

Ooh! I'd like to buy a letter.

Regardless of whether you think they should use different pronouns and wear different clothes, regardless of whether you think insurance should pay for their healthcare costs, you have to be a pretty shitty person to tell someone "you're not even good enough to die fighting for me."

You're retarded.

[Ashliana]

You're retarded.

You're a complete and utter imbecile totally devoid of value to humanity. So, uhh, we're about even. Seek psychiatric care soon.

[Jhynnifer]

There are two important distinctions to make here: not all military are combat troops, and not all trans people have gender dysmorphia.

As such, the President tweeting that people who are trans would not be allowed to serve in the military is very different from tweeting that people with gender dysmorphia would not be allowed to serve in combat.

It's not having one's cake and eating it too, it's pointing out bright line distinctions that (crucially) pre-date the tweets. Distinguishing between trans and gender dysmorphia didn't just suddenly happen after the President sent these tweets. It happened literally years ago.


I'm going to go ahead and assume you've not been reading the entire thread and, instead chose to cherrypick a couple. I haven't said I'm in agreement with the ban, I do have reservations. I'm not happy with what Trump did, he could have handled the situation much better.

My argument there is that Time4fun spent the better part of 5 pages arguing that transgenders should be allowed to serve because the ADA categorizing transgender as a mental disorder was only a legality for having health insurance pay for gender reassignment surgery but at the same time (because it's JUST A FORMALITY for getting surgery paid for) it's not really a mental disorder that should make them ineligible to serve. That's having your cake and eating it too. It's OK to label it a mental disorder so surgery is paid for, but when it comes to missing out on something it's not ok.

Her arguments throughout this thread have helped cement my opinion of the situation, instead of persuading me to see it differently. THAT was the purpose and intent of that post.

[Jhynnifer]

1) So when you say "have your cake and eat it too", I assume you mean "Not be the victim of institutionalized discrimination and also be given access to a procedure you need?".
I love how you twisted this around. It either IS a mental disorder or it's not. You can't pick where and when it's considered one and where it's not and think I'm going to take you seriously. I'm fat. I don't consider myself fat 4 days a week but skinny enough to wear a bikini three days a week because everyone should be allowed to wear bikinis.


Is that really asking so much for someone who is putting their life on the line for their country? The APA and the US Military don't seem to think so.
You're simplifying your arguments here and ignoring the nuance as well.


2) What I'll counter here is- you can't decide that gender dysmorphia is a sign of being mentally unstable and unfit to serve when the people who made the diagnosis intentionally created it to avoid giving that exact impression (they are the experts, after all) AND when the military itself has backed that stance. Likewise, you can't argue that merely having a diagnosis that lives in the DSM automatically disqualifies you from service when there are other medical and psychological diagnoses that don't disqualify you or which are allowable upon a waiver.

The ADA did it.


3) Not all trans people are pre-op upon enlistment, and not all trans people intend to have gender reassignment surgery.
Should I go back in this thread and quote where I said that I have no issue with post-op or transgender people who aren't intending to have the surgery but should they change their mind then they should wait until their contract is up. My entire argument has been that I believe hormone-therapy for pre-op transgenders adds too much risk to the situation to allow them to remain on active duty. If there are options (desk jobs, non-combat, etc) then that's a possibility, but then you're looking at more government money spent here to diagnose and give special treatment (finding places for them in non-combat roles, etc).


What's not helping the argument is ignoring the nuance of the situation for simpler, inaccurate, arguments.


Biggest takeaway: If the US Military has already said that there is no reason to disqualify trans people from serving, then no one here should be arguing otherwise. They've been serving for almost a year with no problems- which means this conversation isn't really about the impact on combat readiness.

Oddly enough, there's a whooooooole section of the constitution that gives us not only the right, but the freedom to argue anything and everything we want to. To let our voices be heard when we're concerned, unsure or disapproving of things happening in our country. But hey, our rights mean nothing when you're waving around your cause flag and shouting from atop your soapbox.

[Neveragain]

While the Ku Klux Klan is often associated with the Neo-Nazi movement and share many of the same ideals, they are not the same thing. Learn your hate groups, n00b.

Dude I don't even get it. Massive drug use, huge separation between the haves and have nots, vanishing trade skill workers, corrupt institutions, states threatening succession, riots in the streets. Sure signs all is well.

AFK need to pray to my Hitler portrait.

[Gelston]

Dude I don't even get it. Massive drug use, huge separation between the haves and have nots, vanishing trade skill workers, corrupt institutions, states threatening succession, riots in the streets. Sure signs all is well.

AFK need to pray to my Hitler portrait.

.... Did you quote the correct post?

[RichardCranium]

Would you trust Bill Cosby if he told you that you could mark the downfall of a civilization by "trans mania" without any information to back up that claim?

I'd argue that anyone would after a couple of drinks.

[hello]

Trump impeached by January 2019. It's going to happen.

[Tgo01]

Isn't it funny how a supermajority of Americans (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-military-transgender-poll-idUSKBN1AD2BL) support trans people in the military, but the regular board neocons seem to have a solidly uniform opinion? What could it be?!

http://i.imgur.com/Q0AIDAD.png

Ooh! I'd like to buy a letter.

Regardless of whether you think they should use different pronouns and wear different clothes, regardless of whether you think insurance should pay for their healthcare costs, you have to be a pretty shitty person to tell someone "you're not even good enough to die fighting for me."

First of all, 58% is hardly a "super majority." Second of all they oversampled Democrats...again! Third of all it's cute how Democrats are relying on polls again after the disaster that was the 2016 presidential election. Fourth of all just because a majority of people support it doesn't make it right, I can find a poll showing a majority of Democrats think 9/11 was an inside job, that doesn't make 9/11 an inside job. Fifth of all if you're going to rely on polls why not focus on the poll on people this change will impact the most, you know, those in the military, of which only 12% support trans people serving openly. Sixth of all just stick to calling everyone a racist and bigot like time4fun does.

[Neveragain]

.... Did you quote the correct post?

Yea, I know it didn't have anything to do with what you said. I was just face palming along with your face palm.

[Ashliana]

First of all, 58% is hardly a "super majority." Second of all they oversampled Democrats...again! Third of all it's cute how Democrats are relying on polls again after the disaster that was the 2016 presidential election. Fourth of all just because a majority of people support it doesn't make it right, I can find a poll showing a majority of Democrats think 9/11 was an inside job, that doesn't make 9/11 an inside job. Fifth of all if you're going to rely on polls why not focus on the poll on people this change will impact the most, you know, those in the military, of which only 12% support trans people serving openly. Sixth of all just stick to calling everyone a racist and bigot like time4fun does.

Ah, yes, the "statistics aren't real, I don't understand what a margin of error is, I'm actively ignoring evidence that doesn't fit my hypothesis" argument. Super convincing.

[Gelston]

Ah, yes, the "statistics aren't real, I don't understand what a margin of error is, I'm actively ignoring evidence that doesn't fit my hypothesis" argument. Super convincing.

He didn't say statistics aren't real, he said he doesn't trust polls to accurately reflect the US. You shouldn't either.

[Tgo01]

Ah, yes, the "statistics aren't real, I don't understand what a margin of error is, I'm actively ignoring evidence that doesn't fit my hypothesis" argument. Super convincing.

Who was supposed to win in 2016 again? With something like a 99% chance based on the polls?

It's also cute how you just totally ignored the rest of my points. Don't think I didn't notice that. Again ignoring everything that is inconvenient to your narrative.

[Jhynnifer]

Who was supposed to win in 2016 again? With something like a 99% chance based on the polls?

I believe you're thinking of Mayor McCheese. 59.33336% of American's agree with me.

Also, I'm still a Democrat!

[Tgo01]

Also, I'm still a Democrat!

I'm sorry. Through prayer and Jesus you can overcome this!

[Jhynnifer]

I'm sorry. Through prayer and Jesus you can overcome this!

LOL, I also don't think either side has it completely right so maybe I'm more in the middle. Regardles, though!

[Ashliana]

Who was supposed to win in 2016 again? With something like a 99% chance based on the polls?

You're hysterically regurgitating right-wing rhetoric as a flimsy pretext for refusing to believe polling on any subject. The RealClearPolitics average for the general election (popular vote) - the most common and widely repeated polls - had Clinton up by 3.3 points. She won the popular vote by 2.1 points. That's well within the margin of error.

A few places hypothesized about the likelihood of a victory for Clinton based on the numbers they were seeing - NYT gave Clinton an 85% chance of winning. HuffPost said something like 98% (shocker). Nate Silver had it at 71%.

Nobody has a magic ball that can predict with any kind of certainty who's going to actually show up to the ballot box, and yes, the polls don't always reach everybody. There's a bunch of plausible explanations for the upset, but "statistics isn't a real field" -- which is the clear implication of your argument -- is bullshit. The fact that you apparently don't understand that 85% isn't the same thing as 100% isn't the New York Times' problem.



It's also cute how you just totally ignored the rest of my points. Don't think I didn't notice that. Again ignoring everything that is inconvenient to your narrative.

:rofl:

It's quite funny that you, of all people, are trying to call anybody else out for this. You do this more often than anybody I've ever seen, and have done so for years. The reason I didn't give you a lengthier response is that you are never interested in a good-faith discussion, or actually interested in the topic. You're interested in being as argumentative as possible for as long as possible, conceding nothing, no matter how badly you embarrass yourself.

But, since you clearly so desire a full response from me, I'll do it.


First of all, 58% is hardly a "super majority."

Miriam-Webster dictionary: supermajority : a majority (such as two-thirds [66.6%] or three-fifths [60%]) greater than a simple majority

Oh. You got me. That critical distinction between 58% and 60%. Thanks.


Second of all they oversampled Democrats...again!

This is conjecture based on you not wanting to believe it.


Third of all it's cute how Democrats are relying on polls again after the disaster that was the 2016 presidential election.

This is right-wing rhetoric that is completely divorced from reality, and based in righteous indignation that your nominee, with underwater approval ratings and a loss in the popular vote, managed to eke out a victory. If you knew anything about polling -- and it's clear you don't -- you wouldn't be making this argument. I already addressed it above.


Fourth of all just because a majority of people support it doesn't make it right, I can find a poll showing a majority of Democrats think 9/11 was an inside job, that doesn't make 9/11 an inside job.

This is a non-sequitur. We're talking about approval ratings -- direct evaluations of FEELINGS -- not opinions about whether or not a historical event, an empirical matter, occurred.


Fifth of all if you're going to rely on polls why not focus on the poll on people this change will impact the most, you know, those in the military, of which only 12% support trans people serving openly.

This is another non-sequitur. The military doesn't set policy for the military in the United States -- civilian command and control of the military is a cornerstone of a democracy or democratic republic. And FYI, you're looking at reporting on a poll done after Obama left office, and it wasn't asking whether or not they flat-out approve of them serving, they were what percentage of them thought the inclusion helped or hurt "military readiness." Would you care to guess what soldiers thought of the inclusion of racial minorities during integration?


Sixth of all just stick to calling everyone a racist and bigot like time4fun does.

Eyeroll. I don't always agree with Time's opinions or ways of structuring an argument, though she engages in much better faith than you do.