Do you think it's smart for the SecDef to allow Transgender individuals to serve in the military?

Jack, thanks for making me research. I like to learn. The presence of an X isn't the last word. Turns out we’re all conceived to be females, and then certain chemicals in the fetal brain can change the physical and psychological parts of the person to male (or stay female). The psychology of M/F is also changed by environmental nurturing, but the strongest effect on behavior is nature after conception and before birth.

You and I were taught classical genetics, but science has progressed. They don’t understand it all yet, but there is definitely something going on in the fetal brain that produces a certain percentage of boy bodies with girl behaviors, and vice versa.
Been fun chatting with you

Thank You, Sir, for your voice of reality.

Capt Michael Greene - You're saying that your sexuality, gender, nationality, ethnicity, etc is my business?

Capt Michael Greene - Interesting research. Still, what business is it of mine? You are what you are and ...

CPT Mark Gonzalez - Ideally all IET service members come in not needing to take medications. Having said that there are exceptions. HRT medications can be discontinued and in some circumstances must be. Often people will stop taking them for a month before surgeries or for up to three months to aid in fertility for those hoping to conceive a child. While it wouldn't be my preference there is an argument to say that an IET candidate must discontinue HRT meds during basic training. I think it's more likely that they will be able to maintain their meds in the same way that a woman can continue birth control during IET. Time will tell.
I agree that deployability must be the standard. Having been deplorable the entire time I've been in transition I can't imagine that it will be an issue.

SSG Patricia King - That means a lot from my view point. The overall familiarity is low, as most people don't even know a TG person, but to me saying you are deployable gives your opinion a lot of weight compared to someone who is not.

SFC James Wright - We have had a ton of opportunity to look at how morale is effected by this. I am fairly public and as a result sensing sessions have been held without me and with soldiers in my unit. Over all the responses have been positive although some were not.
Many responses were more toward a lack of guidance from above.
More importantly, this is not a business of feelings. It doesn't matter if people like that I'm trans or that someone is gay or that someone is Muslim or that they are a Yankees fan. What matters is my ability to do my job. My performance has been solid both before and since my transition. Many of my peers have said that what matters is not if I wear a bra but how I do my job. We are a melting pot inside a melting pot. You will encounter people from all walks of life and need to be able to work with them regardless of your feelings. I would hope that any soldier in my formation would follow my orders and do their job regardless of how they feel about my gender. And any that can't don't belong in my formation.

SFC James Wright - I would say on this issue it isn't the individuals formation or the commanders anymore. It is the presidents formations and the appointees formations. We are being told how we feel about this issue as they say what is best for the Army. As a Soldier if you don't like it, too bad. I say this not as a criticism, but because it is true. Nothing else matters if this issue is involved. Ability to do your job, good order and discipline, etc are all secondary. This is a massive trump card and good luck if you feel differently.

Thank you PO1 Nagel!! I tried my best to stick it out myself but got out after 12 years. Doing well now tho :)

CW2 Lindsey Muller - My Pleasure Chief. I don't know that you want to talk to us Peons after getting your name in Print though. I thought it was Awesome.

SGT (Join to see) you are going to get pushback for how you are explaining this. If you focus on deployability it takes the personal opinions about body modifications or cosmetics out of it. However, I agree that you should not be able to unilaterally declare yourself medically non-deployable unless it is of short duration. It may be politically incorrect to say TG is or is not a mental health condition, but gender dysphoria currently is defined as one and even if removed later it would still be depression. There are also other associated condition many, but not all will suffer from. Good post and thank you for voicing your opinion.

MCPO Katrina Hutcherson - We are not in the empathy business we are in the war business

CPT Mark Gonzalez - the DSM-5, The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders removed Gender Identity Disorder in December 2012. Many people with gender dysphoria do suffer from emotional distress because they are misunderstood and are treated so disparagingly. Normally, when they transition, that distress is alleviated. I don't think anyone in support of allowing transgendered personnel to serve openly and honorably advocated enlisting or commissioning someone who has a mental health condition. I also don't believe that people are joining the military to get transition therapy and surgery. Most insurance already covers hormone therapy and transition surgery usually costs approximately $30,000 for male to female surgery and 12,000 to 25,000 for female to male. Those costs can be considerably less if your insurance covers it. Those amounts are hardly worth risking your life defending your country to get free coverage...

MCPO Katrina Hutcherson - Chief you bring up several topics within your post and that is why this matter is so complicated. The DSM did change, but that didn't impact 40-501.
Regarding recruitment. Several studies that are favorable to TG narrative state that they have a higher population within the military than the general public. So logically it could only help in their recruitment if a benefit was added.
Cost is not cost or a clear cut calculation. It isn't that simple to calculate. For this issue you would be relying heavily upon purchased care and the cost would be much higher in remote locations. Some of the surgical interventions require recovery time. So is this treatment elective or medical? If deemed medical they would most likely be afforded conv leave or free time off. I think we both know that not all HMO's cover reassignment surgery and definitely not all jobs would give paid time off for a 15-45 day recovery. Also HMO's vary, but overall are known for providing poor mental health coverage and that is something this group may need. We already know that TG are a very vulnerable grouping. Does care exist yes, but what is the quality of care for a poor TG person in a remote area? Your economic status and location definitely impact quality of care, access, cost and outcome.

SGT (Join to see), "DOD has been studying allowing transgender soldiers to serve openly and transition for a year now. Know what they found? That it doesnt effect unit readiness or effectiveness ... People who are paid more, know mor, and can do more tham you and I have asked that question, and found out the answer."

This was the directed finding from the top political leaders; the military was not authorized to dissent. You are wrong.

SGT (Join to see) - if the G1 wanted it could query every single known TG person and see who is and is not deployable. Im sure hipaa lawyers would have opinions though. Current regs consider this condition administrative in nature so there is no profile for that, but the profiles would be there for associated conditions. I am not saying all would have profiles, but a % would have depression, anxiety, adjustment disorder, etc with a no check in the functional area of the profile making them non deployable.

If you focus on deployability in my opinion it takes the values or politics out of the issue. Everyone has an opinion, but deployability is what unites us.

CPT Mark Gonzalez, good point. A direct measure of effectiveness.

I believe the same was said during integration and desegregation...

Exactly. TBS is no joke and a new 2nd LT lacks any experience. The good ones rely on their NCO's. A LCPL is not wet behind the ears because the infantry does not promote. They are four year fire team leaders. You don't choose to be black, you choose to act on being trans gendered. Its not the same thing. Also, I hate when people know the rules when they join and then cry about their rights. Just like illegals immigrants etc.

You went to Annapolis and now in flight school. The military world looks far different from where you are standing.

Sgt (Join to see) - First, regarding the Ensign's experience: I believe you have advanced education and a desire to lead as an officer, yes? So allow me, a 10-year enlisted and a 10-year officer, to offer a bit of perspective. I hope, if and when you become an officer, you discover that an academy trained pilot trainee has about 6 years of varied experience and education and training that most SM will never see. Don't dismiss her so easily.
Finally, TG is not a choice. Who would choose a life of being beaten up, shunned, fired and discriminated against? I suggest reading some neuroscience about how gender identity is developed in the womb.
You said a unit would "go to crap." Please explain how the combat effectiveness of a unit is affected because one of the men doesn't have a penis.

I do have advanced education. An pilot is never going to lead anyone unless they become a squadron XO or CO. Even then, they will be leading other pilots and never those on the ground.

I dismiss her military experience. Do you really put that much stock into these loaded studies? In ten years they will say the exact opposite.

I didn't say anything about it going to crap because one of the men didn't have a penis. In fact, you should ask me what I think about women in the infantry but that is another thread.

It's about unit cohesion. If that gets broken down it is not as effective. Perhaps you learned something about that in OCS.

Sgt (Join to see) - Sergeant Peters, I’ve no idea of your experiences or training, so I won’t presume to assume I know your strengths, but I have seen a clue to an area of improvement you might want to think about.
You said “pilot is never going to lead anyone…XO or CO…other pilots and never those on the ground…I dismiss her military experience.”
I’ve little experience with Army or MC pilots, but in the Navy (and AF) none of what you said bears any resemblance to fact. I think you might have made some erroneous assumptions.
First note that, unlike the USA and USMC, the warriors in NavAir (and the AF) are the officers. Except for a few specialties (cops, Spec Ops, PJs), the kill-or-be-killed duties go to the officer corps. The threat of hostile fire or a POW experience in Naval aviation and the USAF is nearly entirely for the Os, and they are trained for that. The E’s are the support personnel for the Officer Warriors.
Also note that the services decided to keep pilots longer, promote them faster, and get a better Return on Investment for all the money and time they put into training them. So Naval aviators are commonly assigned the leadership of enlisted organizations—munitions maintenance and bomb loaders (big muscular Es), electronic warfare shop (highly educated E’s), even the First Lieutenant shop (lower E’s). Be advised that NAVAIR uses its pilots to lead E’s because they want to expose them to many responsibilities and promote them quickly. The service academies provide excellent leadership training reinforced over 4-5 years of attendance. They’re also sent off the reservation to shadow officers in the real fleet.
Another difference is in doctrine. As an E, I had a permanent job. As an O, the requirement was “as soon as the junior officer is competent in the position, they must be moved to another position to gain maximum exposure to all aspects…”
Finally, something I learned about women in the officer corps. If they survive the male BS for four years, they emerge as better leaders and commanders. I told the LT’s I taught: “They are smarter than you, more aggressive than you, more politically astute, and can kick your ass without you knowing it.” Keep in mind that the academy is at least four years. I found it best not to make assumptions about people I didn’t know.
So take that information as you will. To you personally, I wish you a successful career.

My point is that it is a detractor in Combat and cost funds that the military does not have. I know lots and lots of Diabetics and fat dudes that would love to be soldiers too.

Diabetics can't wolf down a big meal and go into combat. Dbx can make you unconscious if you don't maintain your blood sugar hour by hour. That's a problem.
By contrast, TG people have no such problems.
HOW is a TG soldier a detractor in combat? I don't recall any terrible war stories that started out, "This TG guy suddenly couldn't shoot and the whole squad..." Nope. There are already 15,000 TG serving without problem...so how is it going?

Question: Did they say they would pay for the surgery?
Fact: Giving yourself a shot once every two weeks is not real hard. It's just testosterone. Goes in the upper leg. The vial is smaller than an aspirin bottle.

Diabetes is a potentially fatal disease that can involve losing the eyes, legs, or just going unconscious. Blood sugar and the sugar content of meals must be regulated several times a day. The soldier with dbx can't wolf down max calories and fight.
By contrast, if a TG person misses his biweekly shot, maybe his armpit hair grows less, waiting for the next shot. Worst case, a TG man who consistently misses his shots might have a period.

Quick, lets stop the war so the platoon can get their injections.

No doubt
We need to just pray that at some time and some place we will get a senior leadership that will figure out that the Military has one ONE FUNCTION...To fight and win upon arrival and defend the national interests of the United States

SSG Roger Ayscue, roger that!

Outstanding Response to a Stupid Policy. Keep up the Good Work and keep tearing down the walls of Ignorance.

A SIGINTER, Pretty Cool Staff.

I support the cause,, but don't overestimate the importance of a single person in the service. During a RIF, a service will simply cut thousands of people without any regard to how valuable any of them might be. So don't expect them to miss you.

Another question. Would you prefer to wear a dress, heels and lipstick for the rest of your life, 24x7?

Imagine if you, a male, were required all your childhood to wear a pink dress to school and in your school photos. You (any male) would be pretty pissed off. That's what it's like for a transgender man who was born in a female body.

Capt Michael Greene - Sounds like I would have brain damage or a mental disorder. Either way, I shouldn't be allowed to join the military. At least how the policy is written now. If I am joining the military I am supposed to follow the regulations and orders even if I don't agree with them.

In general conservatives try to conserve things as they are, and progressives try to change things. It was a radical progressive idea to tell King George that all of us are created equal. It was the liberal Republican Party that fought to free the slaves. Sometimes, civil disobedience is used, such as when Martin Luther King marched against the law. TG soldiers are simply keeping their gender identity secret while they serve. If we're to progress and give everyone their Constitutional Rights, sometimes it's necessary to resist the rules as they are.
If the Founding Fathers had followed the King's orders, we'd still be speaking English. (Or something like that.) :)

You are correct, it was Republicans who fought to free the slaves. Just like it was Andrew Jackson that was the first Democrat President. Why should we try and change things that have worked for us thus far? We win wars, let's keep the standards the standards. Which Constitutional rights are these? The right to serve in the military? I missed that one. The DSM is based on science, after-all.