CDZ What is the argument FOR banning transgenders from military service?

[Picaro]

it isn't. So I call them transvestites: they can change their clothes. Their sex, not so much.

Exactly. For the same reasons I will keep referring them to as faggots until they stop pissing on our legs and wanting everybody to call them 'gay' instead of what they really are, homosexual fetishists. They clearly know they're sickos and want to hide what they are.

 

[Circe]

Exactly. For the same reasons I will keep referring them to as faggots until they stop pissing on our legs and wanting everybody to call them 'gay' instead of what they really are, homosexual fetishists. They clearly know they're sickos and want to hide what they are.

In 1982 the word "gay" came into PC fashion, unfortunately at the same time as the AIDS epidemic. I read two or three books about AIDS and then found I simply could not say the word "gay." I'd start to, but it just wouldn't say itself.

So eventually I realized that my problem was I seriously didn't think there was anything gay about AIDS and I was just not going to play this game. So I've called them homosexuals ever since.

This has had the side benefit, lately, of reminding me I don't have to use PC language, at least if the word I say isn't so offensive as to stop traffic. So I just say all the old words instead of new euphemisms, usually the fifth euphemism in five years as people try desperately to pretend something that is a terrible problem really isn't a problem at all because it's now got a different name. I don't play that game, either.

I figure, if the words communicate clearly, that's all I need them to do.

 

[depotoo]

https://www.liebertpub.com/doi/10.1089/trgh.2016.0036
Results: Across these 42 studies an average of 55% of respondents ideated about and 29% attempted suicide in their lifetimes. Within the past year, these averages were, respectively, 51% and 11%, or 14 and 22 times that of the general public. Overall, suicidal ideation was higher among individuals of a male-to-female (MTF) than female-to-male (FTM) alignment, and lowest among those who were gender non-conforming (GNC). Conversely, attempts occurred most often among FTM individuals, then decreased for MTF individuals, followed by GNC individuals.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Friendly reminder, this is in the "clean debate forum".

I generally support Trump, but I'm not sold that his desired ban of transgenders from military service is really needed or warranted. Now, I've never served in the military so I cannot say whether transgenders serving have a positive or negative impact on the rest of the armed forces. I've not heard of major transgressions by transgenders, but perhaps I missed them. I do know that Bradley Manning leaked classified materials but, then again, so have some heterosexual service members. I guess I'm of the adage of "If it isn't broke..." So, what is the argument for banning transgenders from military service? Thanks in advance.

A transgender must take hormones and drugs the rest of their life and thus are undeployable, which means unfit to serve.

 

[K9Buck]

Exactly. For the same reasons I will keep referring them to as faggots until they stop pissing on our legs and wanting everybody to call them 'gay' instead of what they really are, homosexual fetishists. They clearly know they're sickos and want to hide what they are.

You may not be aware, but there are a fair number of gays that support Trump and most conservative ideals. Referring to them in this manner in a very public way such as this is counterproductive to the conservative cause. Such statements can and probably do push gays, who might otherwise vote our way, into the open arms of our political opponents. I encourage you to refrain from doing so in the future. Thanks for your consideration.

 

[K9Buck]

Friendly reminder, this is in the "clean debate forum".

I generally support Trump, but I'm not sold that his desired ban of transgenders from military service is really needed or warranted. Now, I've never served in the military so I cannot say whether transgenders serving have a positive or negative impact on the rest of the armed forces. I've not heard of major transgressions by transgenders, but perhaps I missed them. I do know that Bradley Manning leaked classified materials but, then again, so have some heterosexual service members. I guess I'm of the adage of "If it isn't broke..." So, what is the argument for banning transgenders from military service? Thanks in advance.

A transgender must take hormones and drugs the rest of their life and thus are undeployable, which means unfit to serve.

They are unfit to serve in any and all capacities? Can they cook?

 

[K9Buck]

https://www.liebertpub.com/doi/10.1089/trgh.2016.0036
Results: Across these 42 studies an average of 55% of respondents ideated about and 29% attempted suicide in their lifetimes. Within the past year, these averages were, respectively, 51% and 11%, or 14 and 22 times that of the general public. Overall, suicidal ideation was higher among individuals of a male-to-female (MTF) than female-to-male (FTM) alignment, and lowest among those who were gender non-conforming (GNC). Conversely, attempts occurred most often among FTM individuals, then decreased for MTF individuals, followed by GNC individuals.

Thanks. Did they attempt suicide because they're mentally ill or because society rejects them? If society, or more particularly, the military was more "inclusive" toward them, would their suicide rate be lower?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Friendly reminder, this is in the "clean debate forum".

I generally support Trump, but I'm not sold that his desired ban of transgenders from military service is really needed or warranted. Now, I've never served in the military so I cannot say whether transgenders serving have a positive or negative impact on the rest of the armed forces. I've not heard of major transgressions by transgenders, but perhaps I missed them. I do know that Bradley Manning leaked classified materials but, then again, so have some heterosexual service members. I guess I'm of the adage of "If it isn't broke..." So, what is the argument for banning transgenders from military service? Thanks in advance.

A transgender must take hormones and drugs the rest of their life and thus are undeployable, which means unfit to serve.

They are unfit to serve in any and all capacities? Can they cook?

The military has to be deployable all branches all Military specialties. If you can not deploy you are not fit to serve. If already in and become non deployable you usually finish out your current contract and are barred from reenlisting.

 

[K9Buck]

The difference between men and women is in the chromosomes, no amount of clothes changing and sex operations are going to change that detail.
Those that are that screwed up to try a gender altering operation have no business being in the military where other lives are at risk.

Do you believe the JCOS stated that transgenders were fine because they feared for their careers if they gave any other answer?

 

[K9Buck]

Friendly reminder, this is in the "clean debate forum".

I generally support Trump, but I'm not sold that his desired ban of transgenders from military service is really needed or warranted. Now, I've never served in the military so I cannot say whether transgenders serving have a positive or negative impact on the rest of the armed forces. I've not heard of major transgressions by transgenders, but perhaps I missed them. I do know that Bradley Manning leaked classified materials but, then again, so have some heterosexual service members. I guess I'm of the adage of "If it isn't broke..." So, what is the argument for banning transgenders from military service? Thanks in advance.

A transgender must take hormones and drugs the rest of their life and thus are undeployable, which means unfit to serve.

They are unfit to serve in any and all capacities? Can they cook?

The military has to be deployable all branches all Military specialties. If you can not deploy you are not fit to serve. If already in and become non deployable you usually finish out your current contract and are barred from reenlisting.

Ok. I suppose then that the JCOS should have stated as much when they testified to Congress. Do you agree?

 

[K9Buck]

The JC's are a pack of politicians; their own personal careers come first, so they aren't going to do anything that will get them fired or on the bad side of Congress or make themselves political targets. They cave for the same reasons psychiatrists and other alleged 'professionals and scientists' cave in to the faggot mobs; it might cost them money and/or power to have principles.

That certainly may be true, although it would seem cowardly of them to remain silent if they truly felt that transgenders should not serve. Perhaps they had a little talk before their testimony and concluded that telling the truth would change nothing except to imperil their careers. After all, liberals aren't always necessarily fond of the truth.

 

[Meister]

The difference between men and women is in the chromosomes, no amount of clothes changing and sex operations are going to change that detail.
Those that are that screwed up to try a gender altering operation have no business being in the military where other lives are at risk.

Do you believe the JCOS stated that transgenders were fine because they feared for their careers if they gave any other answer?

I believe that we had a liberal administration that had an agenda, no matter how misguided it was.
It would be in line with what you stated about their careers.

 

[depotoo]

Most of the studies had nothing to do with the military. Those were their lives in general.
From the NIH-
Results
The overall mortality for sex-reassigned persons was higher during follow-up (aHR 2.8; 95% CI 1.8–4.3) than for controls of the same birth sex, particularly death from suicide (aHR 19.1; 95% CI 5.8–62.9). Sex-reassigned persons also had an increased risk for suicide attempts (aHR 4.9; 95% CI 2.9–8.5) and psychiatric inpatient care (aHR 2.8; 95% CI 2.0–3.9). Comparisons with controls matched on reassigned sex yielded similar results. Female-to-males, but not male-to-females, had a higher risk for criminal convictions than their respective birth sex controls.

Conclusions
Persons with transsexualism, after sex reassignment, have considerably higher risks for mortality, suicidal behaviour, and psychiatric morbidity than the general population. Our findings suggest that sex reassignment, although alleviating gender dysphoria, may not suffice as treatment for transsexualism, and should inspire improved psychiatric and somatic care after sex reassignment for this patient group.


And what people fail to realize is most lgbt run with like minded people most of the time. In other words, they’re world involves each other. Many play, live and work together.

https://www.liebertpub.com/doi/10.1089/trgh.2016.0036
Results: Across these 42 studies an average of 55% of respondents ideated about and 29% attempted suicide in their lifetimes. Within the past year, these averages were, respectively, 51% and 11%, or 14 and 22 times that of the general public. Overall, suicidal ideation was higher among individuals of a male-to-female (MTF) than female-to-male (FTM) alignment, and lowest among those who were gender non-conforming (GNC). Conversely, attempts occurred most often among FTM individuals, then decreased for MTF individuals, followed by GNC individuals.

Thanks. Did they attempt suicide because they're mentally ill or because society rejects them? If society, or more particularly, the military was more "inclusive" toward them, would their suicide rate be lower?

 

[K9Buck]

Most of the studies had nothing to do with the military. Those were their lives in general.
From the NIH-
Results
The overall mortality for sex-reassigned persons was higher during follow-up (aHR 2.8; 95% CI 1.8–4.3) than for controls of the same birth sex, particularly death from suicide (aHR 19.1; 95% CI 5.8–62.9). Sex-reassigned persons also had an increased risk for suicide attempts (aHR 4.9; 95% CI 2.9–8.5) and psychiatric inpatient care (aHR 2.8; 95% CI 2.0–3.9). Comparisons with controls matched on reassigned sex yielded similar results. Female-to-males, but not male-to-females, had a higher risk for criminal convictions than their respective birth sex controls.

Conclusions
Persons with transsexualism, after sex reassignment, have considerably higher risks for mortality, suicidal behaviour, and psychiatric morbidity than the general population. Our findings suggest that sex reassignment, although alleviating gender dysphoria, may not suffice as treatment for transsexualism, and should inspire improved psychiatric and somatic care after sex reassignment for this patient group.


And what people fail to realize is most lgbt run with like minded people most of the time. In other words, they’re world involves each other. Many play, live and work together.

https://www.liebertpub.com/doi/10.1089/trgh.2016.0036
Results: Across these 42 studies an average of 55% of respondents ideated about and 29% attempted suicide in their lifetimes. Within the past year, these averages were, respectively, 51% and 11%, or 14 and 22 times that of the general public. Overall, suicidal ideation was higher among individuals of a male-to-female (MTF) than female-to-male (FTM) alignment, and lowest among those who were gender non-conforming (GNC). Conversely, attempts occurred most often among FTM individuals, then decreased for MTF individuals, followed by GNC individuals.

Thanks. Did they attempt suicide because they're mentally ill or because society rejects them? If society, or more particularly, the military was more "inclusive" toward them, would their suicide rate be lower?

Thanks for taking the time to look that up and share it. I do appreciate it.

 

[Picaro]

Exactly. For the same reasons I will keep referring them to as faggots until they stop pissing on our legs and wanting everybody to call them 'gay' instead of what they really are, homosexual fetishists. They clearly know they're sickos and want to hide what they are.

You may not be aware, but there are a fair number of gays that support Trump and most conservative ideals. Referring to them in this manner in a very public way such as this is counterproductive to the conservative cause. Such statements can and probably do push gays, who might otherwise vote our way, into the open arms of our political opponents. I encourage you to refrain from doing so in the future. Thanks for your consideration.

I'm sure a fair number of faggots like a lot of stuff, doesn't change the fact they're mentally ill, public health menaces, and rape children at far higher percentages relative to their population, some 2%-3% of the populations and committing 35%-50% + of child rapes, and have no business around children. Besides, it's long known they have nothing in common with with 'progressives' except the Gay Privilege' hoax, and fit right in with the right wing of the GOP mjuuch better than they do with Democras' lip service re poor and working class; they despise those, pander to the rich, into mindless self-indulgence and hedonism,, and sociopaths like most far right wingers.. Many German faggots were early members of the Nazi Party, and a large percentage of them are into S&M sicko shit, feces play, etc.

 

[Natural Citizen]

Bring em all home and build more bases here. We're broke. And that's real defense spending.

That said, when you start talking about gays and straights, now you're viewing people as members of groups rather than individuals. And that's a problem in terms of Individual rights. Rights don't come as groups. Rights come as individuals. People don't derive their rights from belonging to groups.

Every Individual should be treated the same way. Just as a homeosexual's disruptive behavior should be dealt with, so should a heterosexual's disruptive behavior be dealt with. As Individuals.

The pregnancies between all of the screwing around in the military is costing us quite a bit, for example. Who's talking about that? Hm? Who? Nobody?

We need to quit worrying about the issue of sexuality and start worrying about understanding the concept of and the issue of Individual rights. Not group rights.

 

[Chuz Life]

Friendly reminder, this is in the "clean debate forum".

I generally support Trump, but I'm not sold that his desired ban of transgenders from military service is really needed or warranted. Now, I've never served in the military so I cannot say whether transgenders serving have a positive or negative impact on the rest of the armed forces. I've not heard of major transgressions by transgenders, but perhaps I missed them. I do know that Bradley Manning leaked classified materials but, then again, so have some heterosexual service members. I guess I'm of the adage of "If it isn't broke..." So, what is the argument for banning transgenders from military service? Thanks in advance.

The short answer to this question comes down to numbers and the desire to keep things simple and efficient.

The military is best served when the nation's finest, most fit etc. Meet that standard, enlist and serve voluntarily.

Turning the military ito a complex social experiment that lowers that standard in any way or works against the recruitment efforts in anyway is inevitably a threat to our national security.

 

[Picaro]

The JC's are a pack of politicians; their own personal careers come first, so they aren't going to do anything that will get them fired or on the bad side of Congress or make themselves political targets. They cave for the same reasons psychiatrists and other alleged 'professionals and scientists' cave in to the faggot mobs; it might cost them money and/or power to have principles.

That certainly may be true, although it would seem cowardly of them to remain silent if they truly felt that transgenders should not serve. Perhaps they had a little talk before their testimony and concluded that telling the truth would change nothing except to imperil their careers. After all, liberals aren't always necessarily fond of the truth.

Many were appointed by Obama, plus, they don't want to get their budgets cut or otherwise harassed by Congressmen and Senators, and unfortunately the GOP's 'globalist' faction are just as fond of sick faggots as the Democrats are; it makes them feel all 'progressive n sophisticated n stuff', which of course means they don't know shit and are weak ass fashion victims.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Friendly reminder, this is in the "clean debate forum".

I generally support Trump, but I'm not sold that his desired ban of transgenders from military service is really needed or warranted. Now, I've never served in the military so I cannot say whether transgenders serving have a positive or negative impact on the rest of the armed forces. I've not heard of major transgressions by transgenders, but perhaps I missed them. I do know that Bradley Manning leaked classified materials but, then again, so have some heterosexual service members. I guess I'm of the adage of "If it isn't broke..." So, what is the argument for banning transgenders from military service? Thanks in advance.

Mentally ill people can’t serve in the military without creating more problems than they solve.

I don't know. That's why I asked. However, the JCOS testimony to Congress in 2018 doesn't help the argument that transgenders should be banned.

With all due respect to those generals and admirals, they don't sleep in the same foxholes, barracks, or berthing compartments with Jack/Jackie depending on what kind of mood in which they wake up in the morning. They recently starting building all Navy ships without urinals in the heads. There is no way that anything negative would ever reach their ears despite the fact that problems do exist.

 

[Natural Citizen]

I had to look up the difference between transgender and transsexual. Gosh. What a mess.

So eta to my previous post, I can't see a transexual in the military. Those people clearly have an Individual mental health issue status.

Transgender, that's different, I guess, they're born that way? So no apparent mental status issues there.

Of course, then again, should people not enjoy their civil liberties even if they have mental issues? Getting back to the transsexuals. It's a very similar scenario with the gun rights debate.

Either way, still bring em home. As I said, we're broke.