If anybody has the initiative and time, the military is asking for research and studies on this and I guess there's a hefty paycheck too if you do it good enough.

Palm Center Transgender Military Service Initiative: Call For Proposals

http://www.palmcenter.org/call_proposals_2013

Quote from: Jasriella on August 29, 2013, 10:44:58 PM
I can somewhat understand why the military doesn't want to accept or keep trans people. If a person discovers that they're trans and are properly diagnosed while enlisted/commissioned, then the military would be obligated to pay for the transitioning process to correct the "medical deficiency." That's a lot of money that in their opinion they shouldn't have to spend, and I partly agree on that extent.....partly. On top of that, the said soldier would essentially be combat incapable throughout the duration of their transition. I do apologize if this seems harsh but I don't want someone on mixed hormones with me on patrol when ->-bleeped-<- hits the fan. I need to know exactly what my teammates are going to do and how we're going to react and the mixture of hormones from HRT makes that scenario unpredictable.

I can understand the military's reasons for not wanting to sanction treatments and procedures while in service, what I don't understand is why the military won't allow a person to be trans and simply do their job and service and have them wait till their contract is up if they're found out. I've been doing it for 4 years and have another 5 ahead of me and there hasn't been a single problem, but I guess I don't count. After all I knew full well that by enlisting into the U.S. Military that all I would be to the top brass was a number and warm body.When I enlisted, I didn't know there was all this information, all this help freely offered, and most importantly I didn't know a guy could really become a girl in almost every physical aspect except for reproduction. I've had many many nights of crying myself to sleep thinking to myself how stupid could I be? I could in all honesty, if I knew then what I know now, very well be post op by now.

Nobody in their right mind "plans" on transitioning after they enlist in the service. Usually they're coaxed into it with enlistment bonuses and false promises. I knew what I wanted when I went to enlist and I settled for no less than just that, unfortunately I learned the hard way that after you finish boot camp you go wherever they want you to go regardless of what you enlisted for. I was going to be an infantryman and finished infantry school only to be told that I'm not going with my company to the unit I have 3 options, National Guard, Reserve, or get out, so I picked National Guard and became an Army Welder instead.

Quote from: skin on August 29, 2013, 06:34:41 PM
In my case it wasn't until very recently that I accepted it.  While it wasn't the main reason I enlisted, one of the biggest benefits I saw was it forcing the girliness out of me.  Obviously it didn't work.

Thanks for the feedback.  I can understand the positions that you two are in.  I guess I'm more or less confused by the few who state they want to transition, but then join the military.  Of course, there is nothing wrong with doing that as there are benefits to being in the service.  I just fail to understand those who plan to transition while they are in the service when they knew prior to joining that it wouldn't be an option.  Again, nothing wrong about them serving, but it seems like an odd move when the army prohibits transitioning.  Perhaps my assumption in it's entirety is false and everyone realizes they're trans or comes to accept it in the middle of their service which would be after the fact. 

There are a couple of things that need to be considered.  First of all, the US military has an extensive list of medical conditions that are considered "disqualifying" for enlistment or appointment, prior to service, and cause for being discharged if already in the service. These were developed for cis-persons, for the most part.

For instance, "Current absence of one or both testicles, either congenital or undescended is disqualifying."

Any endocrine or metabolic disorders that "prevent satisfactory performance of duty or require frequent or prolonged treatment are disqualifying."

A post-op (neo-vagina) on a transwoman would be operationally unacceptable, due to the requirement for frequent dilation.  HRT is probably disqualifying, much in the same manner as insulin dependent diabetes.

I can see pre-op, pre-hrt, pre-everything persons serving - they do that now!!  And they should not be unfairly discriminated against.

Read the lists ... http://usmilitary.about.com/od/joiningthemilitary/a/intmedstandards.htm

Quote from: Jamie D on August 30, 2013, 07:30:25 PM
There are a couple of things that need to be considered.  First of all, the US military has an extensive list of medical conditions that are considered "disqualifying" for enlistment or appointment, prior to service, and cause for being discharged if already in the service. These were developed for cis-persons, for the most part.

For instance, "Current absence of one or both testicles, either congenital or undescended is disqualifying."

Any endocrine or metabolic disorders that "prevent satisfactory performance of duty or require frequent or prolonged treatment are disqualifying."

A post-op (neo-vagina) on a transwoman would be operationally unacceptable, due to the requirement for frequent dilation.  HRT is probably disqualifying, much in the same manner as insulin dependent diabetes.

I can see pre-op, pre-hrt, pre-everything persons serving - they do that now!!  And they should not be unfairly discriminated against.

Read the lists ... http://usmilitary.about.com/od/joiningthemilitary/a/intmedstandards.htm

It sounds like some of their standards are a bit much, in my opinion.  I don't see why they would discriminate against a male for having one testicle.  That sounds odd to me.  How will that in anyway stand in the way of their performance?  I've had surgery on my genitals for health reasons, and I'm now perfectly healthy and functional. I don't see why someone with one testicle wouldn't feel the same way as long as they fixed the underlining medical threat.  Only accepting Pre-everything transgender individuals is still pretty discriminatory because it shuts the door for trans people who plan on transitioning.  Whether or not they have medical concerns about soldiers being on hormones for health reasons, it is discriminatory.  Sometimes there are legitimate reasons for doing so, but I suspect most of it has to do with traditionalism and fear about troop morale/ team unity.  However, I do acknowledge that I could be wrong on that because my view is based on an assumption.     

What do you think would be the operational effectiveness of an insulin-dependent diabetic who can't get his or her insulin in a battlefield situation?

Or someone who has been on HRT and suddenly, or for a long time, can not get the hormones?

I think the regulations point toward having soldiers/sailors/airmen who are physically fit.

The purpose of DOD medical standards is to ensure that medically qualified personnel, accepted into the armed forces of the United States are:

    (1) Free of contagious diseases that would likely endanger the health of other personnel.

    (2) Free of medical conditions or physical defects that would require excessive time lost from duty for necessary treatment or hospitalization or would likely result in separation from the Army for medical unfitness.

    (3) Medically capable of satisfactorily completing required training.

    (4) Medically adaptable to the military environment without the necessity of geographical area limitations.

    (5) Medically capable of performing duties without aggravation of existing physical defects or medical conditions.

It may be discriminatory, but it is legal, and it is necessary.

Quote from: Jamie D on August 30, 2013, 08:05:58 PM
What do you think would be the operational effectiveness of an insulin-dependent diabetic who can't get his or her insulin in a battlefield situation?

Or someone who has been on HRT and suddenly, or for a long time, can get the hormones?

I think the regulations point toward having soldiers/sailors/airmen who are physically fit.

The purpose of DOD medical standards is to ensure that medically qualified personnel, accepted into the armed forces of the United States are:

    (1) Free of contagious diseases that would likely endanger the health of other personnel.

    (2) Free of medical conditions or physical defects that would require excessive time lost from duty for necessary treatment or hospitalization or would likely result in separation from the Army for medical unfitness.

    (3) Medically capable of satisfactorily completing required training.

    (4) Medically adaptable to the military environment without the necessity of geographical area limitations.

    (5) Medically capable of performing duties without aggravation of existing physical defects or medical conditions.

It may be discriminatory, but it is legal, and it is necessary.

Good point on the hrt.  As I said, I never claimed it wasn't legal, but it is discriminatory nonetheless; however, sometimes discrimination is okay.  It does make sense that the military wouldn't want to have to deal with those who required daily medications, but I still think there is more social stigma surrounding the issue than you are giving credit.  Having said that, I can understand discrimination on the basis of safety of health concerns.  If that's the reason which sounds appropriate to me, then I am fine with their decision in that aspect.

In the case of rejecting males with one testicle, I still maintain that is a pretty harsh standard.  Many live completely healthy lives and don't require special medical attention.  I don't see the medical or safety reason involved for why they would discriminate against them.  I fail to see how that would impact their performance,  but I was never in the military so what do I know.

I think the military's policy on medical issues might change sometime in the future, since more of the fighting will start taking place off of the battlefield and into a computer room. My brother-in-law is in the military, isn't in the greatest of shape, but never stepped foot on the battlefield. He's been in Iraq, Afghanistan, and other places in the middle east, but did everything in the computer rooms. Why do these people need to be in tip-top shape, be abled bodied, etc.? It's only harming the military toexclude people with technical skills just because they're trans, has a medical condition, or disability. I definitely see why ground troops need to be healthy though.

Quote from: learningtolive on August 30, 2013, 08:17:48 PM
Good point on the hrt.  As I said, I never claimed it wasn't legal, but it is discriminatory nonetheless; however, sometimes discrimination is okay.  It does make sense that the military wouldn't want to have to deal with those who required daily medications, but I still think there is more social stigma surrounding the issue than you are giving credit.  Having said that, I can understand discrimination on the basis of safety of health concerns.  If that's the reason which sounds appropriate to me, then I am fine with their decision in that aspect.

In the case of rejecting males with one testicle, I still maintain that is a pretty harsh standard.  Many live completely healthy lives and don't require special medical attention.  I don't see the medical or safety reason involved for why they would discriminate against them.  I fail to see how that would impact their performance,  but I was never in the military so what do I know.

"History of penis amputation is disqualifying."  Uh-oh

"History of major abnormalities or defects of the genitalia, such as a change of sex, hermaphroditism, pseudohermaphroditism, or pure gonadal dysgenesis or dysfunctional residuals from surgical correction of these conditions is disqualifying."

"History of three or more episodes of heat exhaustion is disqualifying."

"Men: Height below 60 inches or over 80 inches is disqualifying.  Women: Height below 58 inches or over 80 inches is disqualifying."

"Current nasal polyps or history of nasal polyps, unless greater than 12 months has elapsed since nasal polypectomy, is disqualifying."

"Current diseases of sebaceous glands to include severe acne, if extensive involvement of the neck, shoulders, chest, or back is present or would be aggravated by or interfere with the proper wearing of military equipment, are disqualifying . Applicants under treatment with system icretinoids, including, Accutane(r) are disqualified until 8 (eight) weeks after completion of therapy."

"Current orthodontic appliances for continued treatment are disqualifying."

Gosh, if braces on your teeth can keep you out, what chance does a transperson have?

Quote from: Jamie D on August 30, 2013, 09:04:48 PM
"History of penis amputation is disqualifying."  Uh-oh

"History of major abnormalities or defects of the genitalia, such as a change of sex, hermaphroditism, pseudohermaphroditism, or pure gonadal dysgenesis or dysfunctional residuals from surgical correction of these conditions is disqualifying."

"History of three or more episodes of heat exhaustion is disqualifying."

"Men: Height below 60 inches or over 80 inches is disqualifying.  Women: Height below 58 inches or over 80 inches is disqualifying."

"Current nasal polyps or history of nasal polyps, unless greater than 12 months has elapsed since nasal polypectomy, is disqualifying."

"Current diseases of sebaceous glands to include severe acne, if extensive involvement of the neck, shoulders, chest, or back is present or would be aggravated by or interfere with the proper wearing of military equipment, are disqualifying . Applicants under treatment with system icretinoids, including, Accutane(r) are disqualified until 8 (eight) weeks after completion of therapy."

"Current orthodontic appliances for continued treatment are disqualifying."

Gosh, if braces on your teeth can keep you out, what chance does a transperson have?

That's my point.  It's fine that they want everyone to meet health and safety requirements, but some of these regulations are over the top and unnecessary. I think it's a little archaic and disqualifies too many people from serving that would otherwise perform well in the military.  By the way, I'm not even referring to transgender people as I do realize it's a complex situation due to the fact that those who are transitioning need medical care.   After thinking about it further, I can see the purpose for certain policies even if I find them to be inconvenient. 

Penis amputation or lack of one or both testicles is not going keep you from joining the military. One of my friends went through the officer candidate school and graduated and is now a 1st Liutenant and he had his penis amputated due to necrosis when he was 14. Also there's a couple people in my unit missing a testicle and one who lost both in the field of duty. If you can pass your APFT (army physical fitness test) they make exceptions. Also a drill sergeant while I was in boot camp had his right arm blown off at the elbow by a short fuse grenade and he obviously they let him stay in. I read an article once as well of a captain that went blind and was allowed to stay in command of his company.

Usually to enlist, you need a clean bill of health and no physical or mental abnormalities. Usually anyway, the genital thing though I can vouch for by personal experience doesn't seem to matter as long as you're able to meet the fitness requirements.

And yeah my point was laid out perfectly there why the military wont allow a person to transition while in service. First thing you're taught in boot camp, you're a rifleman first, a cook or whatever second, and we can't have transitioning people on the battlefield.

I still fail to understand though why a person can't simply be trans and wait till their term of service is over to transition. That there is right next to discrimination of sexual orientation which is no longer an issue.

Quote from: learningtolive on August 30, 2013, 09:48:07 PM
That's my point.  It's fine that they want everyone to meet health and safety requirements, but some of these regulations are over the top and unnecessary.

Most things you can get waivers for.  I had a one-balled shipmate

Quote from: Jasriella on August 30, 2013, 11:02:03 PM
Penis amputation or lack of one or both testicles is not going keep you from joining the military. One of my friends went through the officer candidate school and graduated and is now a 1st Liutenant and he had his penis amputated due to necrosis when he was 14. Also there's a couple people in my unit missing a testicle and one who lost both in the field of duty. If you can pass your APFT (army physical fitness test) they make exceptions. Also a drill sergeant while I was in boot camp had his right arm blown off at the elbow by a short fuse grenade and he obviously they let him stay in. I read an article once as well of a captain that went blind and was allowed to stay in command of his company.

Usually to enlist, you need a clean bill of health and no physical or mental abnormalities. Usually anyway, the genital thing though I can vouch for by personal experience doesn't seem to matter as long as you're able to meet the fitness requirements.

And yeah my point was laid out perfectly there why the military wont allow a person to transition while in service. First thing you're taught in boot camp, you're a rifleman first, a cook or whatever second, and we can't have transitioning people on the battlefield.

I still fail to understand though why a person can't simply be trans and wait till their term of service is over to transition. That there is right next to discrimination of sexual orientation which is no longer an issue.

The Captain you are referring to is Scott Smiley.   He was blinded in an attack in Iraq.

http://fox8.com/2012/09/17/blind-army-captain-continues-to-serve/

  We had a 7' beanpole that worked on the mess deck.  We called him "Lurch".  You can see his head in the works (pipes, ducts and cables) on the overhead (ceiling) as he walked.  He had to bow often. 

  Joelene