Panel Urges End to US Ban on Transgender Troops

[Carlota]

There seems to be a few articles posted today about  certain groups and panels urging the U.S. Department of Defense to lift a decades old ban against people who identify as transgender. With the recent repeal of DADT, many groups are pushing for a repeal on the ban against trans* folks who are serving in the military.

[Jess42]

That would be nice and would definitely help our brothers and sisters serving now. My only concern is, will they let us be ourselves. In other words will they let transwomen  have long hair and the same regulations in uniform that ciswomen have with the nailpolish and jewelry and so on.

[Lauren5]

Then the real battle would be for coverage from tricare.

[JamesG]

Actually that would be a given. In fact the debate/report I heard today on NPR was that the panel was/did discuss that if they "admitted" declared transgendered service members they would have to cover both the cost and time of transition.

I am torn on the issue, as a veteran, I do not like the military being used for "social engineering", it should focus on being as effective a force as possible, and changing the status quo with regards to sex relations in the name of "fair-i-ness" takes away from that.

[peky]

Panel Urges End to US Ban on Transgender Troops
http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/apnewsbreak-transgender-troop-ban-faces-scrutiny-22893840
Lisa Leff; ABC News

The United States should join the dozen other nations that allow transgender people to serve in the armed forces, a commission led by a former U.S. surgeon general said in a report released Thursday that concludes there is no medical reason for the decades-old ban and calls on President Barack Obama to lift it.

"At this time there are no plans to change the department's policy and regulations which do not allow transgender individuals to serve in the U.S. military," said Navy Lt. Cmdr. Nate Christensen, a defense department spokesman.


Edited by LH to comply with Posting Guidelines, added in title to the subject, author, source, and snippet of article

[peky]

How soon ?

[Carlota]

I tend to lose hope in humanity quite frequently. Beware of the comment section, less you want to throw your computer/internet access device out the window and parade over town with pitchforks. 

Just trigger warning and such.

[Amy The Bookworm]

Actually that would be a given. In fact the debate/report I heard today on NPR was that the panel was/did discuss that if they "admitted" declared transgendered service members they would have to cover both the cost and time of transition.

I am torn on the issue, as a veteran, I do not like the military being used for "social engineering", it should focus on being as effective a force as possible, and changing the status quo with regards to sex relations in the name of "fair-i-ness" takes away from that.

I can see your point, but, the military is usually decades ahead of the civilian world in de-segrigation, civil, and human rights for U.S. citizens. If we're ever going to get 100% across the board equal rights ... It'll happen in the military first.

[Carlota]

Out and Serve - SLDN, is an org that advocates for LGBTQ inclusion within the military branch of the government. Accoring to their website, there are several countries around the world where people who identify as transgender may be able to join the military.

"Currently, at least 10 countries permit transgender service in some form: Australia, Belgium, Canada, the Czech Republic, Israel, the Netherlands, Spain, Sweden, Thailand, and the United Kingdom.

Some of these countries have regulations or formal policies regarding transgender service; others consider transgender applicants and service members on a case-by-case basis"

http://www.sldn.org/pages/transgender-issues

[Jess42]

It might be interesting to do an anonymous study or the numbers of people that identify as trans that are currently serving now. I bet there are quite a bit and it doesn't seem to hinder the military at the present, it just hurts the person serving.

[Michelle-G]

I can see your point, but, the military is usually decades ahead of the civilian world in de-segrigation, civil, and human rights for U.S. citizens. If we're ever going to get 100% across the board equal rights ... It'll happen in the military first.

I wish that were true, but the record doesn't bear that out. Take a look at gay and lesbian rights in the military.  Gay and lesbian people made many more inroads toward acceptance in civil society long before changes were made in the military.  Here's the timeline:

1973 - American Psychiatric Association declassified homosexuality as a mental disorder.

1975 - American Psychological Association Council of Representatives declassified homosexuality as a mental disorder.

1990 - World Health Organization declassified homosexuality as a mental disorder.

1993 - The legal restrictions on homosexuality in the armed forces were mandated by United States federal law Pub.L. 103–160 (10 U.S.C. § 654) which was signed November 30, 1993.

This means that Don't Ask, Don't Tell (DADT) was STARTED 20 years AFTER it was declassified as a mental disorder!

1993 - DADT policy enacted December 21, 1993 as Department of Defense Directive 1304.26 (10 U.S.C. § 654), went into effect February 28, 1994

2010 - The Don't Ask, Don't Tell Repeal Act of 2010 (H.R. 2965, S. 4023) enacted in December 2010, implemented by September 20, 2011.

And how about sexual assaults? In 2010 the sexual assault / rape rate in the civilian community was .61 per 1,000 (FBI figures) and in the military it was 74.35 per 1,000 (as reported by the Department of Defense).  That's nearly 122 times as high!

Even now, the subject of transgender people being allowed to serve openly in the US military is 10 - 15 years behind other societies. We rank 40 out of 103 countries, lagging behind countries like Chile, Georgia and even Cuba:

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/feb/20/us-ranks-low-global-index-lgbt-inclusion-armed-forces

http://lgbtmilitaryindex.com

Sure, it's time for that to change, but I'm not holding my breath.

[JamesG]

American society is pretty conservative.

It might be interesting to do an anonymous study or the numbers of people that identify as trans that are currently serving now. I bet there are quite a bit and it doesn't seem to hinder the military at the present, it just hurts the person serving.

Yeah. It tends to attract those motivated by hyper-masculine compensation (raises hand).

OTOH, it does have cost if you allow service members to "become" transgendered, then you accept the costs in time, expense, and disruption.  Because they will be a tiny minority, will have greater impact to an organization which requires uniformity and route processes for efficiency.  Same for operational considerations. It's all a complication and distraction for an organization who's purpose is to kill people and break things in the quickest, most efficient way possible.

After Manning, I am surprised they are even touching this, unless it's being pushed from above for political reasons...

[Kate Thomas]

The Palm Center
REPORT OF THE TRANSGENDER MILITARY SERVICE COMMISSION

The Advocate
Study Urges U.S. Military to Reconsider Ban on Transgender Personnel
BY PARKER MARIE MOLLOY MARCH 13 2014 11:51 AM ET

In a report released today by the Palm Center — a research branch of San Fancisco State University's Department of Political Science focusing on gender, sexuality, and the military — a commission led by former U.S. surgeon general Dr. Joycelyn Elders declared there is "no compelling medical reason" for the military to continue its ban on transgender service members.


of interest https://www.susans.org/forums/index.php/topic,148488.msg1225659.html#msg1225659