Posted on Jan 26, 2015
When, Not If, Will We See Open Transgender Military Service?
94.3K
1.3K
561
86
82
4
On November 23, 2014, the Palm Center released a statement entitled "Military Services Have Failed To Comply With New Defense Department Rules On Transgender Personnel."
http://www.palmcenter.org/files/services%20out%20of%20compliance%20memo.pdf
This followed a report from last March where former Surgeon General Jocelyn Elders led a group that concluded there were no sound medical reasons why transgender people couldn't serve in the military services. It also followed an August report outlining a blueprint for how transgender people can be integrated into the military services - integrated much in the same way as 18 of our allies have already accomplished within their military services.
Military Times covered release of this latest report by the Palm Center. "A change to a Pentagon personnel policy three months ago loosens the rules barring transgender troops from serving in the U.S. military," stated the Army and Navy Times in their article entitled Report: Loophole could allow transgender troops to serve under new DoD policy, "giving the individual services leeway to retain these personnel." The article further stated, "The update -- to Defense Department Instruction 1332.18, Disability Evaluation System -- provides a loophole for the services to let transgender troops serve instead of requiring administrative separation, the Palm Center says."
The same socially conservative religious organizations that argued against repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell (DADT) such as the Center for Military Readiness, the Center for Security Policy, and the Family Research Council, are using almost identical arguments. In the end, those arguments didn't work and DADT was repealed.
DADT was a federal law passed in 1993 that barred lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) service members from serving openly in the military services, and the law needed repeal before LGB service members could serve openly in recent years. All that bars transgender people from serving openly now is the DoD and individual service regulations. And, it appears that the overarching DoD regulation was weakened last August so that the four DoD military services could change their rules now to allow open transgender service.
The military didn't implode when LGB service members could serve openly in the American military services; the military won't implode if – or when - transgender service members can serve openly in the American military services. Honestly, does anybody currently serving in the military, who has given more than a moment's thought to this, really believe there won't come a point in the next five years or so where transgender service members are serving openly? I think most people who've put some thought into this know that it's not a question of whether America will have openly transgender service members at some point, but rather a question of when we'll have it.
So with that in mind, do you agree it's a question of "when" and not "if"? And if you agree it's a "when," how soon do you believe we'll see open transgender military service?
http://www.palmcenter.org/files/services%20out%20of%20compliance%20memo.pdf
This followed a report from last March where former Surgeon General Jocelyn Elders led a group that concluded there were no sound medical reasons why transgender people couldn't serve in the military services. It also followed an August report outlining a blueprint for how transgender people can be integrated into the military services - integrated much in the same way as 18 of our allies have already accomplished within their military services.
Military Times covered release of this latest report by the Palm Center. "A change to a Pentagon personnel policy three months ago loosens the rules barring transgender troops from serving in the U.S. military," stated the Army and Navy Times in their article entitled Report: Loophole could allow transgender troops to serve under new DoD policy, "giving the individual services leeway to retain these personnel." The article further stated, "The update -- to Defense Department Instruction 1332.18, Disability Evaluation System -- provides a loophole for the services to let transgender troops serve instead of requiring administrative separation, the Palm Center says."
The same socially conservative religious organizations that argued against repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell (DADT) such as the Center for Military Readiness, the Center for Security Policy, and the Family Research Council, are using almost identical arguments. In the end, those arguments didn't work and DADT was repealed.
DADT was a federal law passed in 1993 that barred lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) service members from serving openly in the military services, and the law needed repeal before LGB service members could serve openly in recent years. All that bars transgender people from serving openly now is the DoD and individual service regulations. And, it appears that the overarching DoD regulation was weakened last August so that the four DoD military services could change their rules now to allow open transgender service.
The military didn't implode when LGB service members could serve openly in the American military services; the military won't implode if – or when - transgender service members can serve openly in the American military services. Honestly, does anybody currently serving in the military, who has given more than a moment's thought to this, really believe there won't come a point in the next five years or so where transgender service members are serving openly? I think most people who've put some thought into this know that it's not a question of whether America will have openly transgender service members at some point, but rather a question of when we'll have it.
So with that in mind, do you agree it's a question of "when" and not "if"? And if you agree it's a "when," how soon do you believe we'll see open transgender military service?
Policy
Transgender
Don't ask Don't tell (DADT)
Command Post
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 156
1
1
0
I really don't care about the private sexual dealings of servicemembers. I have supervised openly gay troops without issue. It's a matter of professionalism. The issues I see that arise with openly allowing transgendered troops to serve have to deal with the following:
1. Professionalism. If a male soldier (Brandon) takes leave and then returns to duty with breast implants and now wants to be called Brenda how professional can we expect all the other Soldiers in the unit to remain? We serve in a professional organization, but that soldier would instantly become a black sheep.
2. Medical expenses. Trangendered personnel require elective surgery and continuous hormone therapy. Who will pay for all of this? If we are to believe what comes out of DC these days...we are broke. The military spends far too much one on healthcare. At a time when the government wants to lower costs, are.we going to allow individual servicemembers to elect to undergo several elective surgeries and how mine treatments? Who will pay for these treatments. Who will pay for the psychological care that these people need to facilitate their transition?
There are many physical and mental illnesses that disqualify individuals from military service. Gender identity disorder or whatever it is called these days should definitely be in the list. The military can't always be the petri dish politicians use to experiment with social change...especially when it could cause serious issues for the unit and cost American taxpayers millions just to employ transgendered personnel.
1. Professionalism. If a male soldier (Brandon) takes leave and then returns to duty with breast implants and now wants to be called Brenda how professional can we expect all the other Soldiers in the unit to remain? We serve in a professional organization, but that soldier would instantly become a black sheep.
2. Medical expenses. Trangendered personnel require elective surgery and continuous hormone therapy. Who will pay for all of this? If we are to believe what comes out of DC these days...we are broke. The military spends far too much one on healthcare. At a time when the government wants to lower costs, are.we going to allow individual servicemembers to elect to undergo several elective surgeries and how mine treatments? Who will pay for these treatments. Who will pay for the psychological care that these people need to facilitate their transition?
There are many physical and mental illnesses that disqualify individuals from military service. Gender identity disorder or whatever it is called these days should definitely be in the list. The military can't always be the petri dish politicians use to experiment with social change...especially when it could cause serious issues for the unit and cost American taxpayers millions just to employ transgendered personnel.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
The only reason it's talked about is because it has been used for generations as the basis to discriminate against people. Want to stop seeing it all the time, stop discrimination based on religious or lifestyle choices.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
The really funny thing is how will the army will tackle the problem of how to administer PT tests to such soldiers. As they differ only because of biology differances rather than what said soldier identifies as.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
I do not believe that he military should pay for the surgery it is cosmetic. When I wanted my teeth done in a porcelain bridge it was a cosmetic surgery and I had to pay for it myself. So when we choose to have something done that is not actually for the purpose of our health in life or death. The I did agree that the cosmetic for my teeth by of my own. My other bridge was discolored and up where it joined the gum was hurting and needing fixed. But I wanted it replaced my way so I had to pay. I do not regret it at all. Because to me to have a better smile and less problems was better in my book. And now years later found that putting that silver or what it was in your fillings ang teeth were unhealthy so am even more happy I did it my way if tho I had to pay. And each person has their views and beliefs in life but I try to go by judge not that thy be judged.
(1)
(0)
SFC (Join to see)
[~157989: 1SG (Verify To See): As a retired eye specialist (optometrist, optician, among others), I must disagree that LASIK is only cosmetic in that you could wear glasses or contacts instead, but if you want to be, say, a pilot the only way you'll pass visual acuity tests for your certification is w/o glasses or contacrs, as most employers only accept prescrition eyewear as a result of aging, and you had to have passed your original tests without eyewear, meaning LASIK is your only option. Thus I'm not sure it's purely cosmetic in all cases.
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
Honestly I don't care when?! The way I see it, is the same way I feel about homosexuals or women in combat arms.
You meet the standards, you do your job no issus from my side. On the other hand, sexchanes for service members, I'm not sure if I fully agree on that. It's a very expensive and long procedure, I would maybe say after like 10 years of service but not coming in the service and then year later getting it.
Other than that, I couldn't care less what you wear in your freetime or who you have sex with.
You meet the standards, you do your job no issus from my side. On the other hand, sexchanes for service members, I'm not sure if I fully agree on that. It's a very expensive and long procedure, I would maybe say after like 10 years of service but not coming in the service and then year later getting it.
Other than that, I couldn't care less what you wear in your freetime or who you have sex with.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
I think they're planning on arguing the regulations and military perception in Nevuary. I think the military has wasted enough time, money, and resources as it is. No one cares what anyone else does in their personal time as long as they perform well at their job. On the other hand, all the Soldiers dedicating their careers to fishing out whamburgers and French cries are distracting the force, the leadership, and the mission for completely non mission relevant reasons. No one cares. Transgender or gay, keep your personal sex life to yourself like everyone else does and complete your mission. My personal opinion anyways. The military has spent a ridiculous amount of money on this, testing camo for years, and several other cosmetic issues. If we are in a budget crisis, I don't understand why we are still focusing so much of our attention and resources on these things.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
This is ridiculous. If you were born a man and you want to serve it should be as a man. Same in reverse. You want to be a woman when you were a man and vice versa? Do it on your own time after you get out. To serve is to sacrifice, to invlude your "personal" crap. Problem solved.
(1)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
SGT Gabriel Brown I thing the big issue is that they can be kicked out in an ugly for even outing themselves. Like, lift the ban and if needs be, just have a policy that you can't transition while in, but we're not gonna kick you out just for wanting to.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
I agree that it will happen but its going to take longer than a few years. While I think that most people can readily accept gays, lesbians, and bisexuals its harder to accept a transgendered person.
Its also going to be a problem of using the bathrooms and showers because some people just wont be comfortable sharing the facilities with someone claiming to be the opposite sex of what they physically are. This will cause a lot of problems, especially onboard ships underway because the heads on ships are designed for males and females.
The Navy will adjust the same as they did when women started to regularly serve on ships, designating berthings and head facilities for transgendered, but it will have growing pains.
It took me a lot of years to accept gays and lesbians because of how I was raised. I knew that while I served on various ships that I was serving beside homosexuals but they kept it quiet and did their jobs.
I probably one day will accept transgendered people but right now I cannot honestly accept them as readily as I do all other people.
Its also going to be a problem of using the bathrooms and showers because some people just wont be comfortable sharing the facilities with someone claiming to be the opposite sex of what they physically are. This will cause a lot of problems, especially onboard ships underway because the heads on ships are designed for males and females.
The Navy will adjust the same as they did when women started to regularly serve on ships, designating berthings and head facilities for transgendered, but it will have growing pains.
It took me a lot of years to accept gays and lesbians because of how I was raised. I knew that while I served on various ships that I was serving beside homosexuals but they kept it quiet and did their jobs.
I probably one day will accept transgendered people but right now I cannot honestly accept them as readily as I do all other people.
(1)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
PO1 Glenn Boucher "Its also going to be a problem of using the bathrooms and showers because some people just wont be comfortable sharing the facilities with someone claiming to be the opposite sex of what they physically are."
That undoubtedly has a stroke of truth to it, however, it is one of the exact same sorts of arguments people had against homosexuality being allowed out in the open. "Oh, people aren't going to want to go to the shower knowing there are people in there that are sexually attracted" bla bla bla. Turned out to largely be a nonissue!
Realistically, I think the rules might turn out something like "Go to the bathroom you look like" I mean, if someone is post OP then clearly they're gonna have to go to the matching bathroom.
That undoubtedly has a stroke of truth to it, however, it is one of the exact same sorts of arguments people had against homosexuality being allowed out in the open. "Oh, people aren't going to want to go to the shower knowing there are people in there that are sexually attracted" bla bla bla. Turned out to largely be a nonissue!
Realistically, I think the rules might turn out something like "Go to the bathroom you look like" I mean, if someone is post OP then clearly they're gonna have to go to the matching bathroom.
(2)
(0)
PO1 Glenn Boucher
SGT Adam Travis, I agree that the best policy would be to go to the bathroom / shower facilities of your current gender until you have gone through the operation to change your gender.
And your also correct that lots of people made a big hoopla over gays living in the same berthing or using the same bathrooms and showers. Turns out that the gay service members were the ones who were hiding it for years and no one seemed too surprised about it.
Our military will grow to accept it but as with many other huge changes it will have a bit of a rocky road as there will always be people who cannot accept the change.
And your also correct that lots of people made a big hoopla over gays living in the same berthing or using the same bathrooms and showers. Turns out that the gay service members were the ones who were hiding it for years and no one seemed too surprised about it.
Our military will grow to accept it but as with many other huge changes it will have a bit of a rocky road as there will always be people who cannot accept the change.
(1)
(0)
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
I think it'll be soon. There was just a successful lawsuit to allow some Transgender veterans to change their paperwork post service to reflect their actual names.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google