US executive order - relating to gender identity and the armed forces.

Here is the actual file of the lawsuit and their argumentation
https://www.glad.org/cases/talbott-v-trump/
There is a pdf at the sidebar.

There is a pilot in the TV interviews making the rounds about the lawsuit.
Probably the one that others mentioned but I can't find the post anymore. Pilot's name is "Emily Schilling".

According to this profile
https://www.aiaa.org/detail/person/cdr-emily-hawking-shilling-usn

the person has so much experience that it looks like a lot of it was gained while being a man.
(and it is annoying that the sidebar on this website links to "women at Sci-Tec".)

The executive order does not say anything about their pensions - regarding the lawsuit debates - it says that the secretary of defense will create more specialised orders / laws to convert this EO in tune with the law governing the military and should report back later.

I think that anyone who has a lot of valuable experience, both in combat and non-combat roles, should be given a choice before being dismissed: for combat roles, if they did not have surgery that impacts their health, if they are willing to phase out hormones and accept using the respective places (beds, showers...) for their biological sex and not force wrong pronouns from others, they should stay on.
For non-combat roles, it probably depends on the roles, but the rest as above. If they are willing to stay in their role without displaying or performing this belief and forcing it on others, I think that's ok.
As an aside, non-combat roles are not the same as non-deployable, in my understanding. There is a lot of crew that doesn't fight but is part of the operations, like analysts or medical staff.

The similar argument was if a man is delusional and/or suicidal, do you really want to share an intimate female only space with him?

If an adult male cannot accept their sex and is delusional enough to insist they are a woman-is it wise to arm them with an assault rifle?

Not to mention the good salary, access to education programmes, sport opportunities and benefits including a pension - all without needing to expose yourself to danger.

The Spanish armed forces are a boon for men who say they are women, too!

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/spanish-soldiers-have-exposed-the-flaw-in-the-countrys-gender-self-id-law/

Apparently the armed forces are really popular with trans people in America, partly because it gives those living in conservative areas a way to be gender non conforming in a way they are scared to be at home, but also because of the medical treatment they could get for free - hormones, surgery - if they were diagnosed with gender dysphoria.

So a one-stop shop for all your expensive medical needs? Spiffing! And surely preferable to going down the prison route to obtain the same result.

I admit I did smile at that and wondered did the people/person who wrote the EO have a sense of humo[u]r. Or irony, or something.

@Brefugee, yes, sadly, the Irish army has been shown up for that too. But all the more reason to push for honor, truth and discipline as the things to aim for.

"a soldier’s commitment to an honorable, truthful, and disciplined lifestyle, even in one’s personal life."

Pity that doesn't apply to the commander in chief and his crew, though. I know he's not a soldier but a bit more adherence to these principles would be nice.

This is something I understand as well. Plus the cover up and never giving the women any support at all.

There is also an argument as to a male soldiers finding it harder to tolerate a fellow female soldier being hurt (or raped)

Meh. IME it was the fellow military doing the raping

Arbitrary subjective truth? I can’t see anything vague or subjective about the phrase:

“A man’s assertion that he is a woman, and his requirement that others honor this falsehood”.

We all know what the words man and woman mean, despite the desperate attempts by transactivists to change the meanings of those words for the last five to ten years.

Whether you are a man or a woman is, in all cases where there is no DSD involved, entirely objective and can be observed or ascertained without difficulty.

Trump is merely reasserting reality.

My dad worked in the merchant navy in the 50s. All the catering stewards on all the ships were transvestites - this was well known as the way you could live your life as trans. They were totally male presenting at work, but off duty when the ship docked, they would dress up and go out.

Fascinating, but shows that there was Give and take. Not that a group of aggressive Trans do the Taking, while the rest of us have to do the Giving. I don't suppose the stewards were demanding to be called Stewardesses and have a uniform skirt provided.

Thanks for the elucidation👍🏽

The speaker says he campaigned for the ban on L and G people in the military to be lifted "and the trans got added on at the last minute." Sound familiar?

There are 1,328,000 Active personnel and 799,500 Reserve personnel so well over 2 million. 15,000 still sounds a bit rapid onset. I wonder are the physical fitness requirements lower for women? That would be nice for blokes who want to be marines and eat donuts.

Actually, I've just found the video -
https://x.com/robsmithonline/status/1883957912747557046

Yep. The trans lobby are always using LGB as a cover and excuse. Same all over. Sickening.

Hence for example, Simon Fanshawe left Stonewall, the organisation he founded.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-11564363/amp/I-helped-Stonewall-today-plead-business-public-body-reconsider.html

@GreenApplesRedApplesYellowApples

If the transwoman pilot is performing to (probably outperforming, let's face it) what the standard for female pilots is, and females can not get past that level of performance, that is the peak it doesn't matter. They are performing within the expected guidelines for that sex. It might be more of a problem the other way round of course, where the peak probably would never be enough. So it might apply there. But overall Is the jet getting competently flown to expected standards for the sex category or not?

Fighter pilots, male and female, are held to the same standards. No military would send a substandard flyer up in a machine that cost tens of millions of dollars unless they knew they could do the job. Which is also why any doubt as to mental health peak fitness results an either redeployment or medical discharge,

I saw a video yesterday (which I can find again) saying that there are over 15,000 trans people currently in the US military and they're all not allowed to be deployed.

Does anyone know more about this and if it's true or not?

Because it is convenient to use as a fear tactic to leverage acceptance of the legitimate discrimination.

which I know you know.

@GreenApplesRedApplesYellowApples

But the language of the policy is quite specific. The rationale of the EO makes clear that the special accommodations as well as the fact of having what they class as a psychiatric disorder are problematic.

I don't feel we've really got to the bottom of why a scientifically proven sexual orientation which affects nobody else and no-one has to accommodate is the same as a subjective feeling which everybody else has to accommodate. They're opposites, almost.

Edited to tag in Greenapples

I think what I was getting it was that I don't believe they genuinely do believe it. That it's allabout the validation.

Validation .. and Power and Control. Male pattern behaviour all over it.

Why should any other male person be excluded from their chosen career for failing a standard test, whereas another male with a gender identity is allowed to perform at a lower standard and be accepted in that role?

There are absolutely accommodations to be made for female people where that it possible because they are then being assessed within their category?

Why should someone who claims to be the sex that they are not materially be given special treatment over others of their sex category?

But the language is vague. Not appealing to science to back it up.

Anyway I can see that my concerns aren't being shared. I still feel uneasy about it but everyone appears to feel secure that this cannot be used to discriminate against other groups.

I have less optimism but we'll see.