Times article re US military

[mcduffy]

Donald Trump to kick transgender troops out of US military

www.thetimes.com/article/1d5c0dd6-fb79-4e02-b542-171541881529?shareToken=ef33896de57008046bca3589b35f12e6

Not necessarily. Transgender soldiers/airmen & women CANNOT be deployed due to the transitioning medications they're on and that's categorically unfair on everyone else who has to leave their families

As others have said the click bait headline is likely to be an exaggeration of what will actually occur.

It's common for medical requirements to curtail military service.

My friend was thrown out of the university air squadron because of medical conditions that came to light during the medical. Another was thrown out because side she was allergic to a chemical used in the haz mat suits and we weren't going anywhere near the front line.

This makes sense.

If people who have a trans identity pass the physical and mental fitness thresholds, they should be allowed to serve. If they don't, they shouldn't.

I hope that's what's happening here. Otherwise it's unnecessary discrimination and simply showing what real transphobia looks like.

Equally as important would be to make sure that any trans-identifying service personnel who are medically fit to serve are using the facilities that are designated for their sex, not their gender identity.

To add:

If the numbers of medically fit trans-identifying people who feel uncomfortable using the facilities for their sex are significant enough, third spaces might be a reasonable accommodation.

Anyone who won't use sex-specific facilities and refuses a third space alternative should be managed in exactly the same way as anyone else who doesn't follow the rules.

There would be other examples of scenarios where someone's beliefs have led them to refuse to follow rules, I'm sure e.g. there may be Christians who refuse to kill because of the ten commandments. Ignoring the hypocrisy that armies require Christians on the frontline to follow orders to kill, there will be protocols for this kind of issue cropping up.

The only good thing about Donald Trump is that in four years he will be out of office!

There are lots of "medically downgraded" people in the military... its not all fighting roles these days. My DH has been on thyroid medication for 6 years now... still serving. Hes not actually been the top level of fitness since early on in Sandhurst due to an injury there... hasn't affected his career (he can't join certain regiments)

Saying hormome treatment is incompatible with front line roles is fair. But I know of transgender members of the armed services where it doesn't affect their job (other stuff like accommodation is more controversial)

Hello, ex USAF family here. We get a lot of people joining the military to fund their trans surgeries, which obviously is very wrong, so no I really don't have a problem with this at all.

Bloody hell so direct sexual harassment of women then. How was this not illegal?

It does because as a PP stated (and an Army major on LBC earlier also), trans hormone therapy means they cannot be deployed due to the inability to guarantee supply of medications when on the front line.
How is it fair on other military personnel when either transgender people or people like your husband can get a pardon from deployment when everyone else has to leave their families and in some cases, miss the births of one or more of their children?
Also, transgender hormones are for LIFE. So that's means trans people can be in the forces for decades but never^^ be deployed at any point.....? Nah that's not fair

Those ‘medically downgraded’ are already serving members though. And how many areas of the military are never going to be deployed that people get to work their entire careers in? I would expect there are rather few areas of service where someone starts their career and finishes it without there ever being a need for deployment if it came to a crisis situation for their every role. Wouldn’t those roles be civilian roles?

Thanks for this. I too assumed it would be trans people just being treated like everyone else again, but good to have the explanation.

The media is so captured and treats a trans person getting a minor splinter as trans genocide (while the experimental drugs they take are a-ok) so I just don't believe the headlines at all any more.

So there's 2 things going on here.
Since the US Military said it would fully fund transitioning

I'm sure there was an issue last time because some men had to dilate five times a day, and then regularly for the rest of their lives. How does that work in the frontline position. Not to mention the effect on your colleagues.

It will be interesting to see this play out. If there is pushback against his decision, which there will be, then we shall start to see examples of why he thinks it's necessary.

Plus, if the men are allowed in the women's changing rooms, and have colonised everything to do with female personnel in the way they do elsewhere, it could well be affecting a recruitment anyway, certainly female recruitment.

@VegTrug I think you misunderstood... My DH is put in undeployable roles die to his medical grade. He has completely different skills and is employed for those skills (he's basically an accountant). His friends in the infantry couldn't do his job, as they don't have those qualifications.

Those who refuse to kill on religious or moral/ethical reasons are called conscientious objectors they are not allowed to join the military, they also generally don't want to join and regularly fight against conscription even in times of war.
If your interested in seeing how such truly brave people have been treated you should look at what happened to many conscientious objectors during ww1 & ww2, they face derision, violent attacks, jail and sometimes the firing squad

Apart from anything else, having special, more favourable rules for one category of people at the expense of all the others cannot be good for morale, which is quite important in the military. Making it fairer so everyone follows the same rules is much better overall.

Biden had a very high ranking trans officer, so they had a great deal of influence

If you mean Admiral Rachel Levine - high ranking and influential, but not military. One of the weird things about the US is their public health service is uniformed and has military type titles https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Public_Health_Service_Commissioned_Corps The admiral was a paediatrician in a non-combatant service that's essentially equivalent to Public Heath England in fancy dress.

As for the new policy - should the military expel people simply for thinking they are trans? No. Should the military exempt members with certain beliefs from normal medical rules, fund cosmetic surgery, or force women to share accommodation and showers with men? Also no.

I’d be interested to see if those on hormones maintain the level to pass the fitness tests. We’re always told how hormones weaken men so much that it’s a-OK for TW to compete against women in sports but at the same time not quite enough that they have to leave the military.

Plus, we're back to the thorny problem of who is transgender. If you've got AGPs wearing the female uniform it will be an issue in the military, as it is anywhere else.

I assume though that your husband was already enlisted before being downgraded?

Ahhh. But ! We know from the USAF study that those male people
were from then on expected to only meet the female fitness standards.

I assume on duties they would have also only ever be needed to meet female lifting requirements too. Ie the weight they could carry.

If they are being discharged on medical grounds, I see no problem.
If they are being discharged simply because they believe they are the opposite sex, that is wrong.
If service personnel who claim a special identity are deployed in regiments (or whatever the American military terminology is) according to their sex, and use the facilities of their sex, don't rely on drugs or request surgery, I can't see a problem with them staying on. Presumably they are still trans.

If being on medication means you are not deployed on frontline service, and if it's the case that numbers of new recruits claiming a special identity has increased since the military started a policy of funding hormones, surgery, etc, I wonder if the US government is trying to avoid a situation similar to the one faced by the Spanish military. In Spain, benefits aimed at increasing female participation have been taken up by males, most of whom were already in the armed forces. This has meant increased cost to the government without a commensurate increase in personnel.
In the case of the US military, they could be facing increased costs (from funding transition) without a commensurate increase in active personnel.

The armed forces probably offer decent pensions and benefits. Perhaps people are joining up with an eye to not only getting medication and surgery paid for, but also knowing they will not be exposed to the risks that frontline personnel will face. It's certainly possible.

Many trans people don’t bother with cross sex hormones so not sure saying this ban is because being trans is a medical condition is wholly true.

Regardless of the rights and wrongs, the loss of 15,000 from an Armed Forces of 2.86 million probably isn't the gift to Putin you seem to think it is.

Well again, you'd have to decide what is meant by being trans. If a man genuinely thinks he's the opposite sex, and is crushed every time somebody refers to him as male, that's going to be an issue.

Thank you for this. I know two people who were rejected from the military for relatively trivial medical conditions.
Transgender people should accept that normal rules apply to them, as normal people, albeit transgender.