Poll of the Day > Biden to lift Ban on Transgenders in the Military...

(+) Yeah! (+)

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/biden-lifts-ban-on-transgender-people-serving-in-the-military-reversing-trumps-policy/

Good choice?

Why not? It's a volunteer organization. Why would you want to limit the pool arbitrarily like that?

---

I dunno but he's gonna have a rude awakening when I come back from golf break and realizes I'm still the president

It's kind of funny to think about whether there are still some transgenders in there that the military didn't know about, and were never able to identify, simply because their histories were not well documented enough and they passed so well (And I'm sure there were/are)

---

Yes, it's absolutely the right choice.

The ban never made much sense in the first place, and was enacted purely because Trump knew it would make his fans happy. Might as well reverse it for the sake of not arbitrarily limiting the number of available candidates and generally being respectful to people.

---

adjl posted...

The ban never made much sense in the first place, and was enacted purely because Trump knew it would make his fans happy.

---

If people in the military are ok with it then why should anyone else care

---

No reason to leave pointless bigotry in place.

BlackScythe0 posted...

No reason to leave pointless bigotry in place.

---

It's there because of the medical requirements, the same ones that get people with other disabilities disqualified.
---

Kyuubi4269 posted...

It's there because of the medical requirements, the same ones that get people with other disabilities disqualified.

im not really sure how being transgender could be viewed as a disability in the eyes of the military.

---

BlackScythe0 posted...

No reason to leave pointless bigotry in place.

---

Kyuubi4269 posted...

It's there because of the medical requirements, the same ones that get people with other disabilities disqualified.

The justification given was the save the money involved in treating them, which sounds nice enough on paper, until you look at the actual numbers and discover that transgenderism-related health care was costing the military roughly 4% of what it was spending on viagara. It was not a significant expense. The only people that bought the idea that is was were people that were already looking for a reason to kick trans people out, which is exactly who Trump wanted to sell it to.

---

DirtBasedSoap posted...

im not really sure how being transgender could be viewed as a disability in the eyes of the military.

The process of transitioning does have its share of physical side effects that could interfere with their ability to do work, to say nothing of the general mental health distress that such people experience before they become settled in their new gender.

That said, the military already has measures in place to ensure that its members meet whatever standards are needed to get the job done. If you're concerned about trans people not meeting those standards, boot them out if they fail to meet those standards. There's absolutely no need to preemptively rule them out regardless of their abilities.

---

I medically transitioned on hormones while working 60 hours a week in a kitchen, it's certainly possible to meet military standards for physical fitness.

IronBornCorps posted...

I medically transitioned on hormones while working 60 hours a week in a kitchen, it's certainly possible to meet military standards for physical fitness.

Which is all the more reason to determine it on a case-by-case basis and not make any categorical assumptions. Some people might not be able to pull it off, in which case they shouldn't be there. Some can, in which case they should.

The other thing that people seem to forget in these discussions is that the military doesn't just consist of infantry. You don't exactly need to pass stringent physical standards for any of the countless office jobs they have.

---

It's weird that you bring up this, but not the #BidenErasedWomen controversy.

Soup_or_Science posted...

I dunno but he's gonna have a rude awakening when I come back from golf break and realizes I'm still the president

What?


---

adjl posted...

The process of transitioning does have its share of physical side effects that could interfere with their ability to do work, to say nothing of the general mental health distress that such people experience before they become settled in their new gender.

That said, the military already has measures in place to ensure that its members meet whatever standards are needed to get the job done. If you're concerned about trans people not meeting those standards, boot them out if they fail to meet those standards. There's absolutely no need to preemptively rule them out regardless of their abilities.

While I do agree that you should boot out people who fail to meet standards; do remember that they will throw a hissy-fit if the reason they fail to meet said standard is their trans-sexuality. I.E. they're required to meet condition X but being trans means they can only manage X-1 or they can manage X but it's harder for them.

---

Unbridled9 posted...

While I do agree that you should boot out people who fail to meet standards; do remember that they will throw a hissy-fit if the reason they fail to meet said standard is their trans-sexuality. I.E. they're required to meet condition X but being trans means they can only manage X-1 or they can manage X but it's harder for them.

Which is why you build a well-established history of not discriminating unfairly against trans people that you can cite to help people trust that that isn't the issue at hand. Being able to demonstrate why the standards are an inherent, inextricable requirement of the job also helps.

Basically, if you aren't usually a dick, people are less likely to presume that you're just being a dick when you do something potentially objectionable.

---

I should note, that I was also in the military. It really isn't something that would hinder someone who wants to be there.

Zeus posted...

What?

Watch this drive

-takes a swing- BOY HOWDY!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FNdhkT7fRP4

Now tell me I ain't the President

---

IronBornCorps posted...

I should note, that I was also in the military. It really isn't something that would hinder someone who wants to be there.

Im currently in the military, and definitely agree!
---

Zeus posted...

It's weird that you bring up this, but not the #BidenErasedWomen controversy.

I was wondering what logical fallacy you would be using to condemn this.

Whataboutism it is!

---

zeus is so bougie lately

---

I don't think its an issue on paper depending on the particular persons state of mind. More studies are going to be needed. Also, its more men "transitioning" into women who won't be on the front lines anyway. Women into a men though, we'll have to wait and see after Biden starts a war.

---

Women can be on the front lines now.

---

BarneyBosco posted...

we'll have to wait and see after Biden starts a war.

what if we just quit doing that

i dont think anyone would expect it

---

Good strategy cause if another country ends up transgendered that said country will get canceled leading to no deaths cause no one wants that blood on their hands its a win win for everyone

---

Jen0125 posted...

Women can be on the front lines now.

Ayup. They can be shot, killed, wounded, maimed, covered in blood, sweat, tears, mud, and everything else! Just like a man can!

I'm actually fully in support of female soldiers. I'm just baffled at the number of women who forget that being a soldier means, well, soldiering which isn't pretty, glamorous, or anything of the sort.

---

Unbridled9 posted...

Ayup. They can be shot, killed, wounded, maimed, covered in blood, sweat, tears, mud, and everything else! Just like a man can!

I'm actually fully in support of female soldiers. I'm just baffled at the number of women who forget that being a soldier means, well, soldiering which isn't pretty, glamorous, or anything of the sort.

Why do you assume women a) don't realize that and b) don't expect everything to be glamorous? I don't understand. Do you think women are all obsessed with glamour or something?

---

You should do a poll on these things so that people dont get a mod when they respond.

---

I disagree with it, just because from having been in that environment I dont think its something the military can handle appropriately right now.

Cacciato posted...

I disagree with it, just because from having been in that environment I dont think its something the military can handle appropriately right now.

To me this is like arguing women shouldn't be in the military because how can we expect men not to sexually assault them.

BlackScythe0 posted...

To me this is like arguing women shouldn't be in the military because how can we expect men not to sexually assault them.

Okay. Id argue its a little more complicated than that, but to each their own.

zebatov posted...

You should do a poll on these things so that people dont get a mod when they respond.

I usually do, but sometimes I give it rest as not to be so Spammy (like Mr. Du.....)

zebatov posted...

You should do a poll on these things so that people dont get a mod when they respond.

If you can't give your opinion on a subject without getting modded, holding that opinion might mean you're an asshole, and you should strongly consider reevaluating your position to minimize how much of an asshole you're being.

BlackScythe0 posted...

To me this is like arguing women shouldn't be in the military because how can we expect men not to sexually assault them.

It's not entirely invalid. It definitely doesn't mean trans people (or women, in your example) should never be in the military, just that the military has some major cultural issues that it needs to sort out before being able to have trans people in there.

Of course, as we all know, such cultural issues will persist unless they're given a chance to raise their ugly heads so they can be smacked down appropriately. Banning trans people from the military until the issues are fixed will end up being an indefinite ban because the issues will never be addressed unless they cause actual problems. To that end, reversing the ban is the right choice, though it will need to be paired with a concerted effort at all levels of the military to stamp out transphobia. Trump's ban has emboldened transphobes, and they won't take this reversal lying down.

---

adjl posted...

If you can't give your opinion on a subject without getting modded, holding that opinion might mean you're an a******, and you should strongly consider reevaluating your position to minimize how much of an a****** you're being.

You get modded for simple stuff here...you should know that by now, ;-P

pionear posted...

You get modded for simple stuff here

This is true...
---

The funny thing is the ban was the thing that made my Dad turn on Trump after he voted for him. He saw that and was just like "Why the fuck was this even a priority for him?"

No need to complicate the matter. Taxes shouldn't be going to the treatments and drugs. That's like a personal expense. We shouldn't be paying for Viagra or birth control ether.

If you're injured in service, then yeah. I'm fine with that. Government put you in that situation. Same thing with agent orange mutations in Vietnam. That stuff is still causing birth defects over there.

NeoSioType posted...

No need to complicate the matter. Taxes shouldn't be going to the treatments and drugs. That's like a personal expense. We shouldn't be paying for Viagra or birth control ether.

If you're injured in service, then yeah. I'm fine with that. Government put you in that situation. Same thing with agent orange mutations in Vietnam. That stuff is still causing birth defects over there.

I respect your right to your point of view, but subsidized drugs of all those sorts work well enough here in Canada. I'd rather be funding a medical system that cares for transgender folks so we can keep trying to combat suicide rates. Birth control, I'm for. I don't know if I can convince you otherwise, but I think the pills are cheaper monthly than a living baby. But we can discuss it if you want, just my POV.

Viagra, I worked in pharmacies for years and only saw it covered for Veterans (Canada seems to treat vets a BIT better XD), and that was one 90 year old. There was also one exception dude who took it for his lungs and had to have a bunch of paperwork processed to get it covered.

It's dope that you're pro covering stuff being covered in the line of service.

I think people will know that I'm pro trans people being allowed in the military. I think their meds should be covered within that structure too. Most basic-ass meds are cheap as hell to produce, just look at stuff like insulin. It's only jackass companies charging high for it.

---

NeoSioType posted...

Taxes shouldn't be going to the treatments and drugs. That's like a personal expense. We shouldn't be paying for Viagra or birth control ether.

Thats your opinion dude. Id rather leave someones health up to them and their doctors. As long as theyre still able to do the job they signed up for then I think our servicemen and women deserve their benefits for their service.

---

I have had bad experiences with the lgbt community but it is wrong to discriminate against them.
legalize marriage and raise harsher penalties on bigotry, sexism, and racism

kudos to sleepy joe