DADT Repeal Doesn't Do Jack For Trans Soldiers

[Shana A]

Sunday, December 19, 2010
DADT Repeal Doesn't Do Jack For Trans Soldiers
Posted by Monica Roberts at 9:00 AM

http://transgriot.blogspot.com/2010/12/dadt-repeal-doesnt-do-jack-for-trans.html

While this is a historic moment in terms of the odious DADT law finally being struck down in the Senate yesterday by a 65-33 vote to send it to President Obama for his signature, pardon the trans community if we don't share in the GL community's  joy in it happening.

It doesn't do jack for trans soldiers.

Once again it was a case of the GL community gorging itself to gluttonous excess at the civil rights table while leaving no food or crumbs at the table once again for their trans brothers and sisters still in near famine conditions when it comes to our civil rights.

Trans military personnel are still stuck in DADT purgatory

[transheretic]

This is beyond stupid.  DADT was ALWAYS a gay and lesbian specific issue from the get go so repeal of it is also EXCLUSIVELY a gay and lesbian issue.  Sandeen's antics were about trans jacking a gay issue masked as selfless activism but as soon as the repeal is passed out comes the "us poor trans people just got screwed again".  The ones crying and rending garments are the same who fought for years against the growing scientific body of evidence about the neurological intersexed pre natal condition formally known as classic transsexuality!  And the military response to trans soldiers is based on the confusion of classic transsexuality with the psychological conditions.  You get tossed out of the military for trans on a mental basis, not a sexual orientation one.

Give it a rest trans activists, you just make yourselves look like idiots when you do this trans jacking garbage.  All this accomplishes is furthering the divide between gay lesbian and bisexual issues (sexual orientation) and trans and intersexed issues (core identity issues and medical ones) and thus alienating even more (now) former allies.

[Dana Lane]

You want to know what bothers me? ENDA!!!!!!!! And the lack of coverage from just about every news agency. ENDA affects many many more people than DADT does yet DADT was all we heard about. I am thrilled for our LGB brothers and sisters for this victory that benefits them. In the end repealing DADT should help improve the Trans communities rights as well (collateral damage, I suppose).

[tekla]

You know what bothers me?  The fact that we've spent more than $1.08 trillion on two wars, neither of which achieved their goals, or were based on lies to begin with, and all anyone is worried about is getting more troops for those wars, not ending the wars.

To the degree that the repeal further promotes militarism it will prove a Pyrrhic victory at best.

http://costofwar.com/

[transheretic]

You want to know what bothers me? ENDA!!!!!!!! And the lack of coverage from just about every news agency. ENDA affects many many more people than DADT does yet DADT was all we heard about. I am thrilled for our LGB brothers and sisters for this victory that benefits them. In the end repealing DADT should help improve the Trans communities rights as well (collateral damage, I suppose).

ENDA has always been a totally worthless feel good bill.  Any employer with an IQ above room temperature can not hire anyone she or he wishes as long as they aren't totally direct about the reasons.  It is thus almost impossible to make a case under a law like this, gay and les and trans employment remained the exact same in states that had some of this coverage and further, it only addresses employment, not housing, not public accommodations where it might actually have some teeth.

And I will point out once again that the ADA covers classic transsexuals given the growing body of evidence of physical causality.  That is not just my opinion but a legal one in writing by the head of the US AG's civil right division in the nineties.  That would be full coverage.  Employment, housing, public accommodations etc etc etc.

ENDA whining is just whining, the bill always was worthless.

[tekla]

DADT only deals with the military, and the military is under the control of the federal government 100%.  It's pretty much theirs to do with what they want.  EDNA is about imposing rules on private property owned by individuals which is an entirely different thing.

[HelenW]

Until the specific exclusion that includes trassexual people in the Americans with Disabilities Act is legislatively repealed it is still in force no matter what Bill Clinton's AG or the science says.

DADT is a minor victory for the LGBT community.  It covers the few people from our ranks who join the military.  That's it.  The LGB portion of the community are correct in thinking that this is  historic but its overall direct effect will be minimal.

It still behooves the trans community to remind people, not by way of envy or sour grapes but as a reminder of the true scope of this event, that trans people, as well as LGB people, can still be fired from their jobs, thrown out of their homes and denied service in the public sector just because of who they are or who they love in more states than not and while it's true that it would still be possible for an employer to invent another reason to fire someone, an inclusive nondiscrimination law does make it harder for them to do it out of prejudice against us.

ENDA is gone and I'm almost glad it is.  I think it was too limited in scope.  We need to press for the inclusion of gender identity and sexual orientation in ALL current civil rights laws.  We need protection on jobs, housing and public accommodations.  No one would argue that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and subsequent related legislation did nothing to advance racial equality.  We need to be included in this law, as well as the other laws designed to protect minorities.

DADT is history, for now anyway.  Good for them!  Now let's get back to work on bills that affect the entire community and not just a few.

[tekla]

EDNA is DOA in the 112.  Outside of a very few boards like this you're never going to hear the word.

[transheretic]

Until the specific exclusion that includes trassexual people in the Americans with Disabilities Act is legislatively repealed it is still in force no matter what Bill Clinton's AG or the science says.

And you are simply 100% wrong on this because the exclusion is very very specific......transsexuality FROM NON PHYSICAL CAUSES.  After years of pointing this out I have to ask why those who insist on lying about this do so unless it is to further an agenda of denying rights to women of history and holding them hostage for transgender rights.  And a sitting US AG's legal opinion is the next best thing to actual legislation you can get.  With now far more than 300 separate and distinct scientific studies confirming the neurological pre natal nature of classic transsexuality only a creationist would bother to deny it any longer since not a single study refutes it.  Fully transitioned and corrected women, you have access to the full body of civil rights, all that is required is you exercise them because the burden of proof has shifted.

[JS]

And you are simply 100% wrong on this because the exclusion is very very specific......transsexuality FROM NON PHYSICAL CAUSES.  After years of pointing this out I have to ask why those who insist on lying about this do so unless it is to further an agenda of denying rights to women of history and holding them hostage for transgender rights.  And a sitting US AG's legal opinion is the next best thing to actual legislation you can get.  With now far more than 300 separate and distinct scientific studies confirming the neurological pre natal nature of classic transsexuality only a creationist would bother to deny it any longer since not a single study refutes it.  Fully transitioned and corrected women, you have access to the full body of civil rights, all that is required is you exercise them because the burden of proof has shifted.

It's not very very specific. The actual law states that "Under this chapter, the term "disability" shall not include transvestism, transsexualism, pedophilia, exhibitionism, voyeurism, gender identity disorders not resulting from physical impairments, or other sexual behavior disorders."

The protection hinges on whether or not "not resulting from physical impairments" extends to transsexualism. That's a statutory interpretation problem that would likely be resolved by examining the intent of Congress through committee reports, etc.

[tekla]

The logistics of supplying the necessary medical treatments alone get kind of staggering.

[VeryGnawty]

The logistics of supplying the necessary medical treatments alone get kind of staggering.

I agree.  It seems like it would be very stressfull and difficult to transition during service.  Not that there's any way to transition that doesn't involve stress and difficulty.

[Debra]

You want to know what bothers me? ENDA!!!!!!!! And the lack of coverage from just about every news agency. ENDA affects many many more people than DADT does yet DADT was all we heard about. I am thrilled for our LGB brothers and sisters for this victory that benefits them. In the end repealing DADT should help improve the Trans communities rights as well (collateral damage, I suppose).

Yeah I have to say I worry more about ENDA than DADT4Trans. Seems more pertinent but I suppose that someone applying for the military could be considered a job too so yeah.....

[HelenW]

The treatment of any kind of serious condition is stressful.  The DoD already has rules about how to deal with people undergoing certain treatments and will often move them to stateside posts so they can access the best medical care.  It's quite possible to generate appropriate regulations covering a military member's transition.  Don't forget, a number of other military services - Canada and Australia immediately come to mind - already accept and treat transsexual men and women.

The only thing stopping the DoD from allowing trans people to serve is prejudice based on transphobia and misogyny.  Well, that and the hate from the christianist right wingers.

[kyril]

The treatment of any kind of serious condition is stressful.  The DoD already has rules about how to deal with people undergoing certain treatments and will often move them to stateside posts so they can access the best medical care.  It's quite possible to generate appropriate regulations covering a military member's transition.  Don't forget, a number of other military services - Canada and Australia immediately come to mind - already accept and treat transsexual men and women.

The only thing stopping the DoD from allowing trans people to serve is prejudice based on transphobia and misogyny.  Well, that and the hate from the christianist right wingers.

Is it transphobia and misogyny that stops them from allowing people with intersex conditions to serve? or anyone who's ever had any sort of genital surgery other than circumcision, regardless of the reason?

Sometimes it's not transphobia. Sometimes it's just the fact that the U.S. military has an unusually stringent set of medical standards. Having been in the military, I don't understand why my genitals were at all relevant, but the DoD seems to consider them extremely relevant, and not just for trans people.

[pixiegirl]

Every 1st world military has really stringent medical standards, the US isn't special in regard to those requirements. When you can point to several other militaries that have the same medical and fitness standards for personnel who do just fine accepting post- transition MTF/FTMs for enlistment and in accomodating transitioning service people, you can't really argue that the US armys stance is down to medical requisites, something else is going on.