Posted on Jun 8, 2021
Biden, lawmakers highlight inclusion of LGBTQ service members and Veterans
16.2K
331
135
85
85
0
As June’s Pride month kicked off, the Biden Administration and lawmakers in Congress highlighted efforts to be more inclusive of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer persons in the military and Veteran communities, addressing years of past discrimination and countering new restrictions of LGBTQ rights.
Department of Defense (DOD) Press Secretary John F. Kirby, speaking to reporters earlier this month, honored the “the service, commitment, and sacrifice of our LGBTQ personnel in and out of uniform.”
He said that one of Lloyd J. Austin III’s first actions as defense secretary was implementing President Joe Biden’s Jan. 25, 2021, executive order to ensure that eligible transgender persons can serve in the military openly and free from discrimination. Biden’s order also provided a path for service members to access gender-affirming medical care.
Kirby added that the DOD under Austin’s leadership is taking “concerted action” to promote and protect LGBTQ human rights around the globe.
Responding to a reporter’s question, Kirby defended diversity and inclusion in the U.S. military from recent political attacks. Texas Rep. Dan Crenshaw and Arkansas Sen. Tom Cotton, both Republicans, have labeled such efforts “woke ideology.”
Kirby said protecting the nation requires attracting talented volunteers to serve on — and service — aircrafts, crews and warships, and he said DOD leaders make “no apologies” for ensuring an inclusive workplace.
“If you (meet) the standards and you’re qualified to be in the military,” he said, “we want you to be able to do it free of hate and fear and discrimination.”
Inclusion is a work in progress
For the roughly 16% of active female service members and 5% of male service members who identified in a 2018 DOD survey as lesbian, gay, bisexual or some other sexual orientation, Kirby conceded these efforts are a work in progress. Indicators across several areas bear this out, both for LGBTQ personnel serving now and the estimated 1 million LGBTQ Veterans.
Military sexual assault: For instance, a RAND report released June 1, 2021, found that active duty service members who identify as lesbian, gay or bisexual or who did not identify as heterosexual are sexually assaulted at disproportionate rates. Yet DOD rarely examines this issue, the report said.
RAND researchers analyzed 2016 and 2018 data from workplace and gender relations surveys of active duty members. The data showed that lesbian, gay, bisexual or nonidentifying-as-heterosexual service members represented 12% of the active population. However, they were 44% and 43% of all sexually assaulted service members in 2016 and 2018, respectively. (The survey doesn’t ask about transgender identification at all.)
“These statistics demonstrate that assaults on the minority of service members who do not describe themselves as heterosexual constitute almost half of all service members who were sexually assaulted in each of these years,” the authors said in the report. “However, we have seen little focus on sexual assaults against LGB service members in DoD prevention materials, research, or public discussion of sexual assault in the military.”
The report recommended DOD improve data collection to understand sexual assault of LGB service members and develop more inclusive sexual assault prevention strategies and materials.
Compensation and benefits: LGBTQ advocates have long argued that policies such as “don’t ask, don’t tell,” in place from 1994-2011, and the recently reversed Trans Military Ban resulted in many harms, including the wrongful discharge from the military and denial of benefits from the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA).
A commission is needed to study the historic and ongoing impacts of discrimination against LGBTQ service members and Veterans, argued Rep. Mark Takano, the California Democrat who chairs the House Committee on Veterans’ Affairs. He introduced legislation to establish a panel that would hear testimony from service members and Veterans and their families, advocacy organizations and government agencies and issue remedial recommendations.
“Establishing this commission would help Americans understand the effects of anti-LGBTQ military policies, provide a path forward to rectify the injustices, and help create a welcoming culture for LGBTQ servicemembers and Veterans in the military and at VA,” Takano said.
In February, VA announced a wide-ranging review of services provided to LGBTQ Veterans and employees to ensure equity in delivery of medical and gender-affirmation care and procedures. In announcing this policy review, officials reminded LGBT Veterans that care coordinators are present at every VA facility. They can provide LGBT Veterans with access to primary care services, including hormone treatment and HIV prevention services such as PrEP.
Transgender health care: Another bill introduced in the House would prevent DOD from stationing service members who have transgender dependents in states or countries that prohibit or deny them gender-affirming health care and treatment, according to a statement by Rep. Jimmy Panetta, Democrat of California, lead sponsor of the legislation. At the state level, more than 20 new anti-LGBTQ laws have passed this year, many aimed at transgender people, according to the Human Rights Campaign.
Learn more
Biden’s Pride Month proclamation: https://rly.pt/352sgKp
DOD’s policy on military service by transgender persons: https://rly.pt/2TH9LZq
List of VA programs for Veterans who are LGBTQ: https://www.va.gov/initiatives/recognizing-lgbtq-veterans-during-pride-month.
Panetta’s news release: https://panetta.house.gov/media/press-releases/congressman-panetta-introduces-legislation-protect-transgender-military.
Pentagon press briefing transcript from June 1: https://rly.pt/2T6FRgY
RAND’s Sexual Assault of Sexual Minorities in the U.S. Military: https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RRA1390-1.html.
Takano’s news release: https://rly.pt/355Wqw5
Department of Defense (DOD) Press Secretary John F. Kirby, speaking to reporters earlier this month, honored the “the service, commitment, and sacrifice of our LGBTQ personnel in and out of uniform.”
He said that one of Lloyd J. Austin III’s first actions as defense secretary was implementing President Joe Biden’s Jan. 25, 2021, executive order to ensure that eligible transgender persons can serve in the military openly and free from discrimination. Biden’s order also provided a path for service members to access gender-affirming medical care.
Kirby added that the DOD under Austin’s leadership is taking “concerted action” to promote and protect LGBTQ human rights around the globe.
Responding to a reporter’s question, Kirby defended diversity and inclusion in the U.S. military from recent political attacks. Texas Rep. Dan Crenshaw and Arkansas Sen. Tom Cotton, both Republicans, have labeled such efforts “woke ideology.”
Kirby said protecting the nation requires attracting talented volunteers to serve on — and service — aircrafts, crews and warships, and he said DOD leaders make “no apologies” for ensuring an inclusive workplace.
“If you (meet) the standards and you’re qualified to be in the military,” he said, “we want you to be able to do it free of hate and fear and discrimination.”
Inclusion is a work in progress
For the roughly 16% of active female service members and 5% of male service members who identified in a 2018 DOD survey as lesbian, gay, bisexual or some other sexual orientation, Kirby conceded these efforts are a work in progress. Indicators across several areas bear this out, both for LGBTQ personnel serving now and the estimated 1 million LGBTQ Veterans.
Military sexual assault: For instance, a RAND report released June 1, 2021, found that active duty service members who identify as lesbian, gay or bisexual or who did not identify as heterosexual are sexually assaulted at disproportionate rates. Yet DOD rarely examines this issue, the report said.
RAND researchers analyzed 2016 and 2018 data from workplace and gender relations surveys of active duty members. The data showed that lesbian, gay, bisexual or nonidentifying-as-heterosexual service members represented 12% of the active population. However, they were 44% and 43% of all sexually assaulted service members in 2016 and 2018, respectively. (The survey doesn’t ask about transgender identification at all.)
“These statistics demonstrate that assaults on the minority of service members who do not describe themselves as heterosexual constitute almost half of all service members who were sexually assaulted in each of these years,” the authors said in the report. “However, we have seen little focus on sexual assaults against LGB service members in DoD prevention materials, research, or public discussion of sexual assault in the military.”
The report recommended DOD improve data collection to understand sexual assault of LGB service members and develop more inclusive sexual assault prevention strategies and materials.
Compensation and benefits: LGBTQ advocates have long argued that policies such as “don’t ask, don’t tell,” in place from 1994-2011, and the recently reversed Trans Military Ban resulted in many harms, including the wrongful discharge from the military and denial of benefits from the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA).
A commission is needed to study the historic and ongoing impacts of discrimination against LGBTQ service members and Veterans, argued Rep. Mark Takano, the California Democrat who chairs the House Committee on Veterans’ Affairs. He introduced legislation to establish a panel that would hear testimony from service members and Veterans and their families, advocacy organizations and government agencies and issue remedial recommendations.
“Establishing this commission would help Americans understand the effects of anti-LGBTQ military policies, provide a path forward to rectify the injustices, and help create a welcoming culture for LGBTQ servicemembers and Veterans in the military and at VA,” Takano said.
In February, VA announced a wide-ranging review of services provided to LGBTQ Veterans and employees to ensure equity in delivery of medical and gender-affirmation care and procedures. In announcing this policy review, officials reminded LGBT Veterans that care coordinators are present at every VA facility. They can provide LGBT Veterans with access to primary care services, including hormone treatment and HIV prevention services such as PrEP.
Transgender health care: Another bill introduced in the House would prevent DOD from stationing service members who have transgender dependents in states or countries that prohibit or deny them gender-affirming health care and treatment, according to a statement by Rep. Jimmy Panetta, Democrat of California, lead sponsor of the legislation. At the state level, more than 20 new anti-LGBTQ laws have passed this year, many aimed at transgender people, according to the Human Rights Campaign.
Learn more
Biden’s Pride Month proclamation: https://rly.pt/352sgKp
DOD’s policy on military service by transgender persons: https://rly.pt/2TH9LZq
List of VA programs for Veterans who are LGBTQ: https://www.va.gov/initiatives/recognizing-lgbtq-veterans-during-pride-month.
Panetta’s news release: https://panetta.house.gov/media/press-releases/congressman-panetta-introduces-legislation-protect-transgender-military.
Pentagon press briefing transcript from June 1: https://rly.pt/2T6FRgY
RAND’s Sexual Assault of Sexual Minorities in the U.S. Military: https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RRA1390-1.html.
Takano’s news release: https://rly.pt/355Wqw5
LGBTQ+
Joe Biden
Policy
Law
Veterans Affairs (VA)
Posted 3 y ago
Responses: 31
3
3
0
Folks in Joe Biden's party were upset when President Trump made it a priotiy to support gay rights not only in the US, but to insist that other countries did not have the right to kill people for being gay. I guess it is okay now that the Bad Orange Man isn't saying it. Of course, he was also the first American president to go into office saying that he was okay with same-sex marriages, so...
As far as this particular puff piece, there hasn't really been a lot of controversy about gay, lesbian or bi people being in the military, since that has literally no effect on being combat effective. It reminds me a bit of the "don't ask, don't tell" stuff President Clinton tossed out there. It wasn't really changing much, but it let him put his name on something and it didn't hurt, so...
The controversial bit iof the LG+++++ is the part that was added into the grouping for political purposes: Trans... anything actually requiring extensive medication/surgery for an ongoing basis, leaving aside whether you think it is a legitimate thing or not, means you are no longer someone who can be counted on to do what is needed when it is needed. I was already long out when I became an insulin-dependent diabetic, but it still made me sad that it absolutely meant I could not be an effective soldier if we were ever desperate enough for a beat up old medic to be needed.
Of course, there are still folks who legitimately believe we are dealing with gender dysphoria here and not merely a need to put up rainbow flags and tell everyone "I'm okay, you're okay," but those folks will be shouted down anyways since those who have the power at the moment are in no way interested in actual discussion one way or the other.
As far as this particular puff piece, there hasn't really been a lot of controversy about gay, lesbian or bi people being in the military, since that has literally no effect on being combat effective. It reminds me a bit of the "don't ask, don't tell" stuff President Clinton tossed out there. It wasn't really changing much, but it let him put his name on something and it didn't hurt, so...
The controversial bit iof the LG+++++ is the part that was added into the grouping for political purposes: Trans... anything actually requiring extensive medication/surgery for an ongoing basis, leaving aside whether you think it is a legitimate thing or not, means you are no longer someone who can be counted on to do what is needed when it is needed. I was already long out when I became an insulin-dependent diabetic, but it still made me sad that it absolutely meant I could not be an effective soldier if we were ever desperate enough for a beat up old medic to be needed.
Of course, there are still folks who legitimately believe we are dealing with gender dysphoria here and not merely a need to put up rainbow flags and tell everyone "I'm okay, you're okay," but those folks will be shouted down anyways since those who have the power at the moment are in no way interested in actual discussion one way or the other.
(3)
(0)
3
3
0
Well I think we have forgot the squeaky wheel gets the grease.
Quite frankly it is none of my business what you do behind closed doors. But when your on the job this should not be an issue.
The New Military wants you to know everything about them including when and what kind of sex they had last, I see no reason for this to be a part of how you Soldier it does not make you a better Soldier and as of today they do not give awards for that kind of thing. If your partner, Husband, Wife, or what ever is a dependent I have no problem with that. This should not effect how you SOLDIER.
As a leader I see no need for this to effect how you Soldier how ever I need to know you have dependents how many and ages where they reside, disabilities, the same thing with every Soldier. NO I am not going to learn and entire new vocabulary so I can deal with you as a Soldier not happening.
If you find the need to stand on a soap box and proclaim you private life to the world then I find it important to remind you of the section 8. If you want to dream up Other non applicable things to make my job harder then we will deal with it one thing at a time.
Well I am special because I am a Man married to a Man.
I don't care if your married to the Presidents Sister your a Soldier first and I as a leader expect you to act like a Soldier. If doing so is a Problem we have regulations in place to fix that.
No I find no need to be more inclusive, You want a sex change pay for it and do it on your own time.
Before you say it NO I will not support you doing anything to yourself that takes away from Military training and functions. If you want the operation and you get it, and it affects how you Soldier then it would a be violation of your contract. Bye see ya! Anyway you get it. JMTC
Quite frankly it is none of my business what you do behind closed doors. But when your on the job this should not be an issue.
The New Military wants you to know everything about them including when and what kind of sex they had last, I see no reason for this to be a part of how you Soldier it does not make you a better Soldier and as of today they do not give awards for that kind of thing. If your partner, Husband, Wife, or what ever is a dependent I have no problem with that. This should not effect how you SOLDIER.
As a leader I see no need for this to effect how you Soldier how ever I need to know you have dependents how many and ages where they reside, disabilities, the same thing with every Soldier. NO I am not going to learn and entire new vocabulary so I can deal with you as a Soldier not happening.
If you find the need to stand on a soap box and proclaim you private life to the world then I find it important to remind you of the section 8. If you want to dream up Other non applicable things to make my job harder then we will deal with it one thing at a time.
Well I am special because I am a Man married to a Man.
I don't care if your married to the Presidents Sister your a Soldier first and I as a leader expect you to act like a Soldier. If doing so is a Problem we have regulations in place to fix that.
No I find no need to be more inclusive, You want a sex change pay for it and do it on your own time.
Before you say it NO I will not support you doing anything to yourself that takes away from Military training and functions. If you want the operation and you get it, and it affects how you Soldier then it would a be violation of your contract. Bye see ya! Anyway you get it. JMTC
(3)
(0)
CSM William Everroad
I don't think of it is as a proclamation as it is protection. I have had Soldiers who were ganged up on for simply being suspected of being homosexual during DADT. If the sentiment you have stated was more prevalent we wouldn't need to talk about it now.
DADT was great for heterosexuals because we didn't have to change how we talked to anyone. But anytime a conversation, even in passing, strayed into private life, a homosexual would have to guard their speech for fear of inadvertent "outing" and the inevitable reprisal.
DADT was great for heterosexuals because we didn't have to change how we talked to anyone. But anytime a conversation, even in passing, strayed into private life, a homosexual would have to guard their speech for fear of inadvertent "outing" and the inevitable reprisal.
(0)
(0)
SFC Robert Walton
"I have had Soldiers who were ganged up on for simply being suspected of being homosexual during DADT." Did you fix that Issue CSM?
(0)
(0)
3
3
0
Now, I'm not going to say that the following incident occurred, but.... IF, years ago, a gay soldier had made unwanted advancements in the shower, and IF I had turned the hot water on him, then WHO was the aggressor? Maybe if I was a member of some "offended" group, I could have gone crying to the Commanding Officer. As it was, the matter was settled "Out of Court". THAT is probably a reason why the "statistics" are so skewed in one direction.
(3)
(0)
SPC Robert Conway
No, you were simply a victim of an unwanted advance and responded violently to it.
Both parties were wrong. But you escalated it to assault.
Both parties were wrong. But you escalated it to assault.
(1)
(0)
MSG Lonnie Averkamp
This was prior to February 28, 1994. Perhaps, it would have been better if I had him put up for an Undesirable Discharge, and wear THAT around his neck for the rest of his life.
(2)
(0)
SFC Robert Walton
SPC Robert Conway - NO Wrong They were both Soldiers. The person that is the aggressor Is guilty of unwanted Sexual assault. The second was SELF DEFENSE against SEXUAL ASSAULT. KEEP YOUR HANDS TO YOUR SELF YOU HAVE PHSICALLY ASSULTED ANOTHER SOLDIER. I am pretty sure they do not teach shower groping anywhere in the Military. However they still teach self defense.
(0)
(0)
SSG(P) (Join to see)
Gays sexually harass gays. They go after each other and account for the majority of harassment cases.
(1)
(0)
3
3
0
(0)
(0)
SFC Robert Walton
PFC David Foster - I don't see them as equal rights i have see people discharge from the army with fixable issues but cost and lack of being deployable erased any chance of getting fix on the job but LGBTQ can just join up and get plenty of health care money spent to change them physically WOW can we say lopsided benefits? Dependent health care stopped because cost. Whitey is inherently racist this was posted about so the whole conversation has imploded into (we got to get whitey in line.) MT
(1)
(0)
PFC David Foster
SFC Robert Walton - I'm sorry fella, I can't make any sense of your argument. I wish everyone well though.... As far as I'm concerned, I have the same rights to the next person in line, no matter their skin color, sexual preference, or gender.
(0)
(0)
2
2
0
These people have always been fighting beside us among the ranks. Ones sexual preference, gender, skin color, religious choice, or other individual qualities have absolutely nothing to do with their patriotism or bravery....
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
It use to be we were all the same in the military. Now one is protected with special privileges if they are different. Can anyone think of a better way to divide? What about courage, teamwork, discipline, temperance and loyalty?
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
They just want special treatment with flags and a pride this and that I call bull.
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
Joining the military is an act of personal commitment. You are willing to do what this country asks you to do to protect the freedom of our Republic. It makes no difference, in my opinion, what your personal believes are as long as you are willing and able to do your assigned duties.
(2)
(0)
SSG(P) (Join to see)
what about violent felons, the insane, convicted child molesters and other mental unstable and untrustworthy people? Many of those are willing, why do we keep them out?
(0)
(0)
SFC Robert Walton
SSG(P) (Join to see) - Nailed it they have a metal issue and are not dependable and pose a danger to the rest of the people either directly or indirectly. nothing else to b said.
(1)
(0)
2
2
0
If you require what would be termed maintenance medication you are considered a non-deployable asset of the unit, which thus lowers the unit's readiness. By a maintenance medication I refer to people who are diabetic (insulin has storage requirements), have high blood pressure, high cholesterol, thyroid deficiencies, or anything similar. If you require any of these things you can only really serve in a fixed facility environment and that limits the number of positions available to you at your grade, otherwise your service comes to an end for medical reasons. The same would be true for transgender individuals preparing for gender reassignment surgery or post-operative. You cannot restrict the fixed facility assignments to only people with any of these conditions because those positions may be required for someone to have a normal career progression (one of my classmates in my CAS3 class was an OR nurse whose unit's deployment responsibility was to be backfill at Walter Reed Hospital). Ultimately it comes down to whether or not you can be deployed. If you require special conditions, treatment, medication, etc, then you are considered non-deployable and are therefore limited in how you can progress in the military. If you are willing to live with that as conditions of your service, fine. If not, sorry.
(2)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google