US SC Approves Ban on Trans in Military

[skliss]

44 minutes ago, Earl.Of.Trumps said:

Oh, please, sci-nerd!

It has nothing whatsoever to do with being fit or not fit, for gawds sake.  The military legally can and does refuse people who have a medical condition that requires ongoing care at high expense, like diabetes. 

I don't see "Diabetics Unite" holding any protests over the military's actions, do you?

Do you know how much it costs to give these people operations and lifetime supply of estrogen/testosterone injections? gad.

My son is a type one diabetic and they told him he's not eligible to serve.

[Dark_Grey]

46 minutes ago, Kittens Are Jerks said:

It's all discrimination.

Costs for gender reassignment surgery (and other procedures/medications) are extremely low.

...that entirely depends on how far you are willing to go to "look the part", if you know what I mean. If you just want fake boobs, sure it's cheap. 

Quote

According to the Rand Corporation study, these costs are about one-thousandth of one percent of the Defense Department's budget. The military spends ten times as much treating erectile dysfunction, and five times as much on Viagra.

"The wall" is a minuscule part of the defense budget as well. It's all relative. More importantly, it's all about the precedence you are setting. For example, "emotional support animals" on planes - first we allowed dogs, now just about anything goes. If we are willing to pay for re-assignment surgery, what else should we be paying for?

[Sir Wearer of Hats]

53 minutes ago, Kittens Are Jerks said:

It's all discrimination.

Costs for gender reassignment surgery (and other procedures/medications) are extremely low. According to the Rand Corporation study, these costs are about one-thousandth of one percent of the Defense Department's budget. The military spends ten times as much treating erectile dysfunction, and five times as much on Viagra.

Well, the army does like its men to Stand To Atttention on command....

[Earl.Of.Trumps]

18 minutes ago, Kittens Are Jerks said:

Here are a couple:

https://www.politico.com/story/2017/07/27/trump-transgender-military-ban-no-modification-241029

https://www.cnn.com/2017/07/27/politics/trump-military-transgender-ban-joint-chiefs/index.html

 

Thanks kittens.  I see the reason why, now.  

The Pentagon is bracing for White House guidance on enforcing President Donald Trump's decision to ban transgender people from the armed forces — orders that military and legal experts say could kick out thousands of troops who just a year ago were told they could serve openly.

Yup. Didn't think of that

 

[Agent0range]

19 minutes ago, skliss said:

My son is a type one diabetic and they told him he's not eligible to serve.

I think I remember that has something to do with insulin having to be refrigerated.  Not guaranteed refrigeration or power when deployed..

[Kittens Are Jerks]

58 minutes ago, Earl.Of.Trumps said:

t has nothing whatsoever to do with being fit or not fit, for gawds sake.  The military legally can and does refuse people who have a medical condition that requires ongoing care at high expense, like diabetes. 

I don't see "Diabetics Unite" holding any protests over the military's actions, do you?

Not a reasonable comparison. The reason diabetics can't join the military has nothing to do with discrimination or cost, and everything to do with how dangerous active duty would be for them. It doesn't matter how well a person is self-managing, anything and everything could go wrong. Long periods of time without food, high stress levels, loss or damage of an insulin pen... any of these could be deadly.

[Dark_Grey]

55 minutes ago, Kittens Are Jerks said:

Closer to 10,000, according to the Rand Corporation. Not the the number is important, because even if just five or six individuals were affected, the ban is still based on a faulty premise, is still ludicrous, and bans people not because of their qualifications or ability, but because of who they are. 

https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR1530.html

Eh, it's next to impossible to get real world numbers because the definition of "trans" has been distorted to include a rainbow of different sexual flavors. Where did you get the number 10,000? I don't see it on the Rand page?

Quote

• It is difficult to estimate the number of transgender personnel in the military due to current policies and a lack of empirical data. Applying a range of prevalence estimates, combining data from multiple surveys, and adjusting for the male/female distribution in the military provided a midrange estimate of around 2,450 transgender personnel in the active component (out of a total number of approximately 1.3 million active-component service members) and 1,510 in the Selected Reserve.

1.3 million active members / approx 2400 trans people = ~0.18% of the active military identify as trans, according to iffy polling numbers. 
IDGAF if they are trans or not, the military should have one requirement: capability. Whether you are a 90 lb CIS woman or a 260 lb trans man, if you can carry the load and hit the targets, welcome aboard.

[skliss]

5 minutes ago, Agent0range said:

I think I remember that has something to do with insulin having to be refrigerated.  Not guaranteed refrigeration or power when deployed..

I get it, you can't have the guy next to you have a low sugar incident at a critical moment. I believe he was told he could be civilian hired for a desk job but that wasn't his interest.  He won a 4 year full tuition scholarship to college so all is good. 

[Setton]

44 minutes ago, DieChecker said:

Most transgender persons are now disqualified from military service:

 

44 minutes ago, DieChecker said:

 

So... Yeah, most Transgendered people in the military are going to be fine and unaffected, .

How do you square those two quotes? 

[Kittens Are Jerks]

9 minutes ago, Dark_Grey said:

Eh, it's next to impossible to get real world numbers because the definition of "trans" has been distorted to include a rainbow of different sexual flavors. Where did you get the number 10,000? I don't see it on the Rand page?

Near the top of the page under Key Findings. It states:  There Are an Estimated 1,320–6,630 Transgender Service Members in the Active Component, but Not All Will Seek Gender Transition–Related Treatment. Add to that their estimate that there could be between 830 and 4,160 in the reserves. So their estimate totals 10,790.

Edited January 22, 2019 by Kittens Are Jerks
Minor correction.

[spartan max2]

This is blatant discrimination. 

[travelnjones]

Well I don't think you really can be pre op and do it, but post op is ok.  You just can't sign up for that kind of commitment and be down for as long as you would post surgery.  Just like me getting a kidney transplant you would be 4f.

Edited January 22, 2019 by travelnjones

[SHaYap]

I remember the days when transgenderism was the ticket to get out ... they've come a long way baby ....
 

Quote

 

~

[00.01:03]

 

~

 

 

[ExpandMyMind]

2 hours ago, Dark_Grey said:

I believe the initial controversy was in regards to the military paying for gender re-assignment surgeries like they would pay for one's higher education. However, I wouldn't be surprised if there is a tinge of discrimination in there somewhere.

Well, if that were really the case then you'd ban the surgery, not the whole class of people.

[Agent0range]

2 hours ago, ExpandMyMind said:

Well, if that were really the case then you'd ban the surgery, not the whole class of people.

I got two free babies and a vasectomy out of the military.  The thing about cost is...Army doctors and hospitals don't operate like that.  Everyone has a rank and grade.  An army surgeon gets paid the same whether they are in their office playing solitaire, or under the knife.  There is no overtime, there is no inflated insurance cost at an army hospital.  The military basically works under salary.  So, what costs are we talking about here?  The costs to run the extra lights in the operating room?  You can't compare the cost in a civilian hospital to a military hospital...it just doesn't translate.

[Earl.Of.Trumps]

3 hours ago, skliss said:

I get it, you can't have the guy next to you have a low sugar incident at a critical moment. I believe he was told he could be civilian hired for a desk job but that wasn't his interest.  He won a 4 year full tuition scholarship to college so all is good. 

Now the question is,  what happens to the trans on the battlefield that gets cut off from supplies and has to go without injections of hormones?

this is so obvious to anyone with a "correct" brain, as opposed to a politically correct one.

[Tatetopa]

3 minutes ago, Earl.Of.Trumps said:

Now the question is,  what happens to the trans on the battlefield that gets cut off from supplies and has to go without injections of hormones?

this is so obvious to anyone with a "correct" brain, as opposed to a politically correct one.

I don't know, what does happen?  Do they fly into an uncontrollable rage, storm an enemy position single-handed  and get a purple heart and a silver star? 

[Agent0range]

10 minutes ago, Earl.Of.Trumps said:

Now the question is,  what happens to the trans on the battlefield that gets cut off from supplies and has to go without injections of hormones?

this is so obvious to anyone with a "correct" brain, as opposed to a politically correct one.

Have you ever been on the battlefield?  Do you know what it's like to go without things you need while you fight a war?  If not, you shouldn't ask what they would do.  If you didn't serve, the trans people in the military are already more American than you.

[+DieChecker]

5 hours ago, Setton said:

 

How do you square those two quotes? 

I'd have to say the first quote didn't come from me. I went back and read the two posts I made in this thread and didn't see that I wrote "Most transgender persons are now disqualified from military service". Except as maybe from an article quote.

Edit: oh I see. You left off the "except..." there you go... quote fully explained. 

IMO, considering those exceptions... Most transsexuals will not be affected.

Edited January 23, 2019 by DieChecker

[Earl.Of.Trumps]

1 hour ago, Tatetopa said:

I don't know, what does happen?  Do they fly into an uncontrollable rage, storm an enemy position single-handed  and get a purple heart and a silver star? 

It wouldn't be a pretty sight, Tat. They certainly risk going back to their real wrongly assigned gender and they could sue the military for wrongful abuse.  OMG!

[aztek]

1 hour ago, Agent0range said:

Have you ever been on the battlefield?  Do you know what it's like to go without things you need while you fight a war?  If not, you shouldn't ask what they would do.  If you didn't serve, the trans people in the military are already more American than you.

 

5 hours ago, Agent0range said:

I think I remember that has something to do with insulin having to be refrigerated.  Not guaranteed refrigeration or power when deployed..

so when it is about diabetics, it is fine, when another person brings same point about trans, you attack him, and question his degree of being an american, (he was not even talking about trans being unamerican, why the hell did you even bring it up?  lamo. a desperate laughable attempt of s shill, to throw some more sht around, 

[Earl.Of.Trumps]

1 hour ago, Agent0range said:

Have you ever been on the battlefield?  Do you know what it's like to go without things you need while you fight a war?  If not, you shouldn't ask what they would do.  If you didn't serve, the trans people in the military are already more American than you.

Well thanks for that cogent banishment! That sure taught me.

[+and-then]

2 hours ago, Earl.Of.Trumps said:

Well thanks for that cogent banishment! That sure taught me.

That's how he rolls.  Most people who serve don't throw it up in other's faces as much as he tends to do.  I sincerely respect anyone who serves honorably but that doesn't give their opinions added weight for me.

[Space Commander Travis]

11 hours ago, Dark_Grey said:

The wall" is a minuscule part of the defense budget as well.

A minuscule amount of the "defense" budget seems to be spent on "defense". Most of it seems to be on supporting "valued allies" in their own wars in which there's no possible remote threat to the United States, or in trying to overthrow governments - sorry, Regimes - that these Valued Allies want to see overthrown for their own purposes. But that may be going off the point of this most interesting discussion.  

[Earl.Of.Trumps]

8 hours ago, and then said:

That's how he rolls.  Most people who serve don't throw it up in other's faces as much as he tends to do.  I sincerely respect anyone who serves honorably but that doesn't give their opinions added weight for me.

What can I tell ya, and then?   I guess some people want to "strut their stuff". The guy was military...? Good, I thank him for serving.  And no, his opinion gets equal weight...

Unless he's a she