• Current Events & Politics
    Welcome Guest
    Please read before posting:
    Forum Guidelines Bluelight Rules
  • Current Events & Politics Moderators: deficiT | tryptakid | Foreigner

Pentagon to Allow Transgender Individuals to Enlist Despite Trump Objections

Not everyone in the military branches even sees the front lines. Many get redirected to domestic departments, depending on their expertise. Lower ranks do get shipped off though, usually.

Whether you support or hate the military is irrelevant to everyone having equal opportunity to freely chose to sign up.
 
Blue_Phlame said:
Sometimes it is better to remain silent, if the alternative will incite hate. However, one should always speak out against evil, and promote the spread of truth and condemn lies.
Click to expand...

Yes sexuality is personal and not anyones buisness and therefore sexuality in itself shouldn't really be any employers buisness.

Transgenders may need on going hormones or whatever suits their needs so like any other employer the army would have to factor this into their cover.

I dont know about the health cover of the US army but here the dept of veteran affairs has comparable cover to medicare which is used widely by ex service personell and rightly so I must say.
 
Foreigner said:
Not everyone in the military branches even sees the front lines. Many get redirected to domestic departments, depending on their expertise. Lower ranks do get shipped off though, usually.
Click to expand...

Even if your unit gets deployed, many never leave the FOB, and a detachment typically stays back stateside to handle support and such that the unit needs from back home.
 
Foreigner said:
Not everyone in the military branches even sees the front lines. Many get redirected to domestic departments, depending on their expertise. Lower ranks do get shipped off though, usually.

Whether you support or hate the military is irrelevant to everyone having equal opportunity to freely chose to sign up.
Click to expand...

We can all think of situations where having a certain condition would bar someone from serving effectively on the front lines, and would better be suited for desk work in the home countries offices.

But enlistment rejections aren't limited to those only going to armed battle. Certain physical and mental requirements are standard for enlistment, and certain ailments are disqualifications.

Check this out: https://www.military.com/join-armed-forces/disqualifiers-medical-conditions.html
 
Blue_Phlame said:
Check this out: https://www.military.com/join-armed-forces/disqualifiers-medical-conditions.html
Click to expand...

But that bit at the end
Any condition that in the opinion of the examining medical officer will significantly interfere with the successful performance of military duty or training may be a cause for rejection for appointment, enlistment, and induction.
Click to expand...
...could nullify any disqualifying-condition if a finding shows that it won't significantly interfere with successful performance of military duty. So why were these (some mild) conditions listed in the first place, if not for the potential of a condition to lead to significant impairment of duty?

The physician in this case may be the gatekeeper, and if they don't see the same way as another physician regarding a certain condition, then those afflicted with a condition may or may not get what they want depending on who gives the examination. I'm not familiar whether second opinions are available for military recruits.
 
Last edited:
Bone spurs can apparently keep you out of the military but not affect your golf game, I've read. :)

I'm sticking with the opinion of Secretary of Defense James Mattis, a retired four-star general not having any issues with transgender individuals in the military. I'm guessing he's more of an expert than any of us will ever be about the troop readiness and morale.

This issue is just a draft dodger making hay, and I have no respect for that kind of stuff.
 
I have a friend who wanted to join the US military, wound up getting rejected because they found out they'd been previously treated for depression.

They're pretty strict with their requirements.
 
This kinda reminds me of when lgbt types get pissed off when for various reasons they're not allowed to donate blood.

It's like at some point the idea that this is supposed to be an act of selflessness is forgotten. And it becomes less about wanting to do it and more about wanting to be allowed to do it.
 
alasdairm said:
for somebody who frequently accuses people of not thinking, you do make the silliest statements sometimes, droppers. the flat foot things depends entirely on the severity and is generally only a problem if the extent of the condition impacts the candidate's ability to walk or causes pain. simply stating "you can't get into the army with flat feet" is an over-generalization and is incorrect.

sounds to me like you're just assuming. can you be a little more specific?

alasdair
Click to expand...

Just making a point that they bar people from joining for things that appear to be pretty insignificant at face value. Getting your dick chopped off and taking a bunch of hormones is not insignificant. Logic and reason should be used of political correctness and emotion in something of such potential consequence.
 
Blue_Phlame said:
But that bit at the end

...could nullify any disqualifying-condition if a finding shows that it won't significantly interfere with successful performance of military duty. So why were these (some mild) conditions listed in the first place, if not for the potential of a condition to lead to significant impairment of duty?

The physician in this case may be the gatekeeper, and if they don't see the same way as another physician regarding a certain condition, then those afflicted with a condition may or may not get what they want depending on who gives the examination. I'm not familiar whether second opinions are available for military recruits.
Click to expand...
Qft, you make a solid point, so long as the doctors are ones that work for the military as the gatekeepers.
JessFR said:
This kinda reminds me of when lgbt types get pissed off when for various reasons they're not allowed to donate blood.

It's like at some point the idea that this is supposed to be an act of selflessness is forgotten. And it becomes less about wanting to do it and more about wanting to be allowed to do it.
Click to expand...

Yeah I always found their attitudes about this very off putting. Pretty sure gays can give blood to Red Cross now since they can easily test for hiv, which I'm good with. With intorant positions taken now like having to say preferred pronouns or jail and forcing people to bake their cakes, I'm convinced the push for the normalization of pedophial is an ultimate goal of these 'progressives'. So all of these folks and their hotdog parties can come out of the shadows lol. Okay might be a bit of a tin foil hat wearer on that one.
 
Droppersneck said:
I'm convinced the push for the normalization of pedophial is an ultimate goal of these 'progressives'. Okay might be a bit of a tin foil hat wearer on that one.
Click to expand...

Ok yeah that's tin foil stuff lol ;)

I think the blood donation issue is a fair disgruntlement though, since it's based on 30-year-old rules when it wasn't easy to test for HIV.

Though having said that, they aren't the only ones discriminated against. Very healthy steroid-using bodybuilders with extremely rich desirable blood (very high in haemoglobin thanks to steroids) are also denied the right to give blood if they've ever injected, because of the incredibly ignorant assumption they share needles. When in fact research shows no evidence they ever do this, that they're more paranoid than average medical practitioners about sterile procedure, are generally socially conservative, have higher incomes, and thus buy all the sterile equipment they need, with no need to share or scrounge old bent rusty used needles from some dirty underpass.
 
In the United States, questions about sexual activity related to eligibility for blood donation are currently based on specific behaviors, not on sexual orientation (this includes transgender individuals).

Men who have sex with men (MSM) must wait one year after having sexual contact with another male.

Prostitutes: An individual who has engaged in sex for money or drugs since 1977 is ineligible to donate.

Other: Anyone who has had sexual contact with someone in the following categories should defer donation for 12 months since sexual contact:

1) an individual in either of the above categories (i.e., MSM or prostitute as defined above),

2) an individual with hepatitis (B or C), or

3) an individual who has ever used needles to take any drugs, steroids, or anything not prescribed by a doctor (i.e., IV drug user).

More information available at American Red Cross Criteria for Blood Donation

Note: There are other organizations that deal with blood donations. Individual organizations have their own questionnaires and eligibility criteria that vary slightly. I've tried to use best practices information above, not American Red Cross guidance.
 
Last edited:
cduggles said:
In the United States, questions about sexual activity related to eligibility for blood donation are currently based on specific behaviors, not on sexual orientation (this includes transgender individuals).

Men who have sex with men (MSM) must wait one year after having sexual contact with another male.

Prostitutes: An individual who has engaged in sex for money or drugs since 1977 is ineligible to donate.

Other: Anyone who has had sexual contact with someone in the following categories should defer donation for 12 months since sexual contact:

1) an individual in either of the above categories (i.e., MSM or prostitute as defined above),

2) an individual with hepatitis (B or C), or

3) an individual who has ever used needles to take any drugs, steroids, or anything not prescribed by a doctor (i.e., IV drug user).

More information available at American Red Cross Criteria for Blood Donation

Note: There are other organizations that deal with blood donations. Individual organizations have their own questionnaires and eligibility criteria that vary slightly. I've tried to use best practices information above, not American Red Cross guidance.
Click to expand...

Sounds like the UK and US have pretty similar blood donation rules now.
 
I know the current rules are more progressive, likewise the complaints aren't as frequent anymore either. But my point was that I find it a little odd that people get so worked up over it.

I've lost count of how lifetime bans on giving blood I meet the critera of. At least 3. And since pretty much all of them are a result of stuff I've done as a heroin addict I'm sure I'm not alone here in being banned from giving blood for multiple reasons.
 
I know the current rules are more progressive, likewise the complaints aren't as frequent anymore either. But my point was that I find it a little odd that people get so worked up over it.

I've lost count of how lifetime bans on giving blood I meet the critera of. At least 3. And since pretty much all of them are a result of stuff I've done as a heroin addict I'm sure I'm not alone here in being banned from giving blood for multiple reasons.
 
cduggles said:
If Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis, a retired four-star general, doesn't believe that transgender individuals interfere with military readiness and they should be allowed to continue to serve in their current capacity, then that's basically sufficient.
Click to expand...
amen. one of trump's better appointments.

alasdair
 
Droppersneck said:
Uhhh I never saw where Mattis condoned it?? I just saw that he urged a panel to look into whether or not it would effect troop readiness.
Click to expand...

Hmmm... first read what I posted again. (Or perhaps we have different definitions of the word "condone"? :D)

Then look.. derp... I think I saw it on a super-liberal site called military.com quoting a memo to the Pentagon from Mattis or maybe it was defense.com or maybe americanmilitarynews.com? No, I think I heard it on the radio.

It's nice when people post links, isn't it? :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top