Show your support for TG's in the Military

[Kelly DeWinter]

Show your support for TG's in the Military by posting a photo of yourself or memorabilia of your service. If you prefer write a comment or two for those who are serving or for those who have served. This is not limited to any nation. Comments are not limited to service member all are welcome to post.

I served in the US Navy and am honored by those who are currently serving in the US and in other nations around the world.

280175280176

** moderators, I might have posted this in the wrong forum, my apologies.

[Lana Mae]

I served in the USAF from 1970 to 1974. I earned my marksmanship ribbon and our squadron earned the outstanding unit award! I attained the rank of E4. I had a 5 level in my job. I offer support to all the others serving their armed forces around the world! Hugs Lana Mae

[Alice Torn]

I served in the U.S. Air Force in Texas, and North Dakota SAC missile security. I must not be phoney, and be true. I have mixed feelings about TGs in combat. I do not believe it is good for morale, for TGs with male plumbing to shower with natal females. It is not considering the women's rights to privacy, and their comfort zones. I also do not think the military should pay for SRS. The military is not a university, or social experiment. It is for defeating foreign and domestic enemies who want to destroy us, and take us captive. i know I will be skewered for this. Sorry, just giving my honest opinion , and i served for the right to do so. I wasw kicked out of the military, but got an honorable discharge. I wass discharged because at theat time i had joined a church which observes the Saturday sabbath day, and also was pacifist, so i could not bear arms. I begged for the Ir Force to let me stay in, but at that time, they discharges me. I was devastated, because i really wanted to serve my four years, or more. Interesting, that a man in the same type of religion was a hereo, saving many lives, in the movie about him. "Hacksaw Ridge. " I am no longer in that church, but today, i think the military would have let me stay in. I was pissed at the pastor who talked me into getting out. I wrote him a long letter. After i left the service, my life was very difficult, with low paying labor jobs.

[Teresa]

Kelly,
I made this point in another thread, and it's good to see you are proud to serve as well as proud to be TG.

I stayed on the civilian side but maintained a large military ATC radar site under a RAF contract for many years . I applied and was accepted for a short service commission to fly helicopters but somehow got sidetracked into starting my own photography business.

Did being TG stop any of that happening ? no it probably drove me harder trying to bury it .

[cdinmd206]

I have to agree with Alice and I served from 1971 to 1974. The military is not a social organization.

[Kelly DeWinter]

I have to disagree the Military is a social organization many vets build bonds that last for many years, you build trust and teamwork on a level the civilian world finds hard to understand. I served on the Point Loma , one of the first Navy ships to have women onboard. Yeah it was hard for about 2 months. Most current military units are integrated. The point most of everyone here who disagree forget is that transgender servicemen are already serving in the military, some have been for years, they have been in combat, they have trained next to you. Its like marriage, they have just kept it hidden.

[Aunt Kelly]

As union president, I had the honor of initiating the first female professional firefighter in our department. Making allowances in how we did things was no harder than what any family would do to accommodate male and female siblings. It is disingenuous, if not downright ignorant, to suggest that military units can not do the same thing. I hear such arguments a lot, almost always from those who've never served. It's just not an issue. "The generals" have said it isn't. Stop letting a few desperate politicians' cynical gamesmanship divide us.

[Tracy Irving]

I can see both sides of this issue and will take none. I anticipate quite a bit of bashing so I will post something I recently read (I did not write it so don't attribute any quotes to me) that might bring a little balance...

Nobody has a "right" to serve in the Military. Nobody. What makes people think the Military is an equal opportunity employer? Very far from it. The Military uses prejudice regularly and consistently to deny citizens from joining for being too old or too young, too fat or too skinny, too tall or too short. Citizens are denied for having flat feet, or for missing or additional fingers. Poor eyesight will disqualify you, as well as bad teeth. Malnourished? Drug addiction? Bad back? Criminal history? Low IQ? Anxiety? Phobias? Hearing damage? Six arms? Hear voices in your head? Self-identify as a Unicorn? Need a special access ramp for your wheelchair? Can't run the required course in the required time? Can't do the required number of push ups? Not really a "morning person" and refuse to get out of bed before noon? All can be reasons for denial.

The Military has one job. War. Anything else is a distraction and a liability. Did someone just scream "That isn't fair"? War is VERY unfair. There are no exceptions made for being special or challenged or socially wonderful. You change yourself to meet Military standards. Not the other way around. I say again: You don't change the Military... you must change yourself. The Military doesn't need to accommodate anyone with special issues. The Military needs to win wars.

[CynthiaD]

As I said in another thread, I served in the US Army from 1969 to 1972. I support anyone who wears a uniform to defend their country. I also believe that anyone who wants to serve and is physically able to do so should be allowed to serve. Denying anyone the privilege of serving for essentially arbitrary reasons is just plain wrong.

Tracy Irving posted while I was writing this, and I need to respond.

I'm not suggesting that the US military make any changes. We need it to stay exactly as it is, the best fighting force in the world. Many transgendered people have the ability to contribute to this goal, and they should be allowed to do so. Many of the members here are or were career military. Many more were short-termers who served honorably and well. We need dedicated hard working people in our military, regardless of whether they wear tighty-whities or lace panties.

[Kelly DeWinter]

Tracy;

As Aunt Kelly said we have the honor of serving and not just in the Military.
The Military qualifies personnel to serve, just like any other company or service anywhere. The issue with the Commander in Chiefs tweet, is that according to the Pentagon, they were 'NEVER CONSULTED'
The Military's job has certainly evolved over the years, it is no longer just war, in recent years its included, disaster relief,nation building,peace keeping,hostage rescue,defense and deterrence and many more roles.Whoever wrote the article clearly has either not served, or served so long ago they forgot to add scurvy to the list of disqualifications.

So back to the OP

Thanks for those who also served on the civilian side. and Merchant Mariners too.

[Genny B]

If you apply for a civilian job can they deny hiring you because of how you might use to company provided medical insurance plan? I support our troops. OohRah.

Genny B

[Rachael Leigh]

I never had the privilege to serve but truly salute all who did with much thanks,
The action taken by the president I feel is wrong but I can see both sides. To me though being trans is not a distraction
for those who can do their job as anyone else. I think there are just a few in the admistration that are behind this and I don't think it will stand but who knows.
Thank you again to all those here for your service
Rachael Leigh

[Tracii G]

I support the military and trans people just to let everyone know.
Social media right now is all abuzz and its nothing but anti trans bashing and getting ugly.
Why people couldn't have just left it alone and stuck with don't ask don't tell.
I have probably 10 friends that have left me hung out to dry over this so its stung me pretty hard.

[Aunt Kelly]

You are so right, Tracii. This is painful and divisive - exactly what they wanted. This is a bump in the road. The worst of us are encourage and exploited by this kind of rhetoric. It's going to turn around and probably sooner than we think.

[Hellen]

I also served in Air defence (in different country) and I agree with Alice that US Military should not pay for SRS. But I also think that everyone should have an opportunity to serve the country and the military is nothing to do with gender. WW2 just showed that men and women can fight equaly. For example: Luftwaffe was avoiding dog-fights with "night witches" during night time in Leningrad/Sant Peterburt. That unit was 100% women one and they were flying much less advanced planes.

[Tracii G]

Pretty sure the top Russian sniper of WWII was a female

[IleneD]

God Bless, Senior Chief Petty Officer (ret) Kristin Beck USN.

On the day after I retreated Ilene back into her closet, Kristin had the courage to stand up (once again) for TG and LGBT peoples.
I frankly have mixed thoughts about the suitability for service of many TG's, but it's an opinion biased from decades serving in the Fleet myself. I understand the obstacles and problems. So does Beck, and I join her now.

Were it not for recent TG pioneers and the stories of those like Beck (and even Jenner), I'd could still be mired and muddled in confusion and fear; believing I was gay or just mentally ill. Those women helped not only save me but led me to understand the swirl of feelings and incongruent thoughts about my gender. I was able to read their accounts. They read very much like the typical Life Story offered on the forum by members. I always read them thinking," They are talking about me and my life."

I'm so bloody tired of the ignorance and bigotry I witness on the news and social media. I'm entirely over it coming from my own family and loved ones too.

Don't ever diminish the notion of "RAISING AWARENESS". Until Jenner sprung forth, and then Kristin Beck, into the public light I had no idea of Transgender or what it meant. For all I knew (a handful of years ago), TG was the same as gay. I was a queer man. Now I know better, and I thank the Kristin Becks of this world for it.

I'd give a lot to sit and have a beer with SCPO Beck some day. Fascinating.

- - - Updated - - -

Kelly,

God bless you dear, and I thank you for your service (shipmate).

[Tracii G]

Serving takes a special kind of person that sees the big picture and wants to be a part of something bigger than themselves.
Not all TG people fit the bill just to be honest and now you are going to have activists coming out of the woodwork raising hell and we just don't need that right now.

[Lorileah]

I have to agree with Alice and I served from 1971 to 1974. The military is not a social organization.

huh? explain that? You assume that TGs are a social construct? You also assume that being TG is somehow a sexual thing that will disrupt the unit. Considering there are between 7000 and 1500 TGs now serving and that 10 countries have had trans members for years, I don't agree.

U.S Army 91T 1974-1978.

[Stephanie_V]

US Army, 1990 - 1993. 19D. F Troop, 2nd Squadron, 11th Armored Calvary Unit.

I see no issues with TGs in the military. The US military has had women in their different branches for decades. The 'overwhelming' cost is horse crap. Drop in the bucket. If a person can meet the physical and mental qualifications there should be no reason to bar them.
That being said, the military has always acknowledged that physically women do not possess the strength and stamina as men. So there is president in that sense.

[Georgette_USA]

First off I would like to thank all others that served in whatever they did.

I think that any person that can qualify to serve should have a chance. We are not people that have a mental condition. Are problem is with everyone else and the way that they treat us.

I was in the Navy from 69-74. There was a little thing going on called the Vietnam War, where many lost their lives.

As for the idea of our people in uniform needing to be ready to fight wars. But most in uniform are never fighting the war in the front lines. There are somewhat openly FtM Trans-Men in IRAQ and Afghanistan that are fighting in a war. I have met quite a few MtF and FtM that are doing there job openly, whatever it is. Had a good chat with a FtM in the Navy that is working on getting women access to all kinds of ships and Submarines.

I was stationed aboard a SSBN Submarine, we launched large nuclear ballistic missiles. We were at sea for two months at a time. Nothing in my job required being fit to be a ground thumper. I was a Fire Control Tech, the ones that programmed the missiles and launched them. My job could be done by anyone, male female or Trans like myself. I had a Top-Secret clearance, and rose to E5 eligible for E6, but I took an early out instead.

In fact in 72/73 I was outed as Trans/CD. Both the Psychiatrists and security people saw no problem with what I did off-duty off-base, as I was very open with them, their only concern at the time was any homosexual activity, and told me to just go back and do my job.

[ChristinaK]

I served 20 years in the US Air Force. This is a tough issue for me as I see both sides of the issue. The military is NOT like a civilian organization and often times accommodation cannot be made for people that are different. Does a man that has had HRT and has breasts and a pens go to the common showers with men or women? Do you put her in a common sleep space with men or women? At what point does she wear the female uniform?

With the close living and working conditions, I guarantee that person would be bullied, made fun of, ostracized and biased against. It could cause an entire unit embarrassment and affect esprit DE corp. I know I'll be slammed for this post, but it would be true for some units depending on their mission.

Yes, many, many carrier fields would lend well to TGs. But, as they cannot discriminate, some fields would not be viable for a TG person. Remember that we represent only about .3% of the population and most people accept gays much more than TGs.

I have mixed feelings about this since I'm TG and was in the Air Force as well. If they had found my stash in the barracks it would not have ended well.

What a person does on their off time is private, as long as it doesn't reflect on the service. If a MTF wants to wear a dress to the mall, that's fine, as long as they don't identify themselves as a service member in a public way. We have been doing that forever and it should stay that way.

In a perfect world, I would have loved to wear the female uniform. But, it's not realistic even in today's world. The military has one goal. To fight and to win. Distractions of the magnitude making TG political correctness and punishing people for using the wrong pronoun is anathema to harmony in the ranks. There is too much PC in the service now. Injecting TG correctness would only make it worse.

I feel sorry for the 2000 plus people that came out when they were told they would be accepted. I suppose those people will be involuntarily separated and that is absolutely unfair to them.

I was excited to hear that TGs would be allowed and wished that would have been the case 30 years ago. In addition, the military health care paying for transition was particularly interesting to me as I might have used that privilege. But, after considering the complexity of the issues, I don't think the US military is ready for it. Yes, other militaries allow it, but they are much smaller than our military and other cultures are more tolerant of nonstandard individuals.

Okay, let me have it girls, I know I'm in the minority on this one!

[GretchenM]

USN 1969-1973. I was stationed at the Naval Air Technical Training Center in Millington, TN. I never went to Nam. I support TG's in the military. I would like to point out that the vast majority of military people never see combat. I don't know what the fuss is all about. Not many women are in combat roles but are in the large support roles. Even more men are there as well. There is a place for everyone who is physically fit to serve. My father and three uncles were in the Navy during WWII. My father maintained Norden bomb sights in Adak, Alaska. The others were on ships. None saw any action. But everybody in the military is presumably willing to fight and give their lives to protect their country. I think perhaps somebody should ask the troops if they care and stop listening to the big headed politicos. Let's not forget, the current president did not serve and for him to decide the fate of TG's in the military without even explaining what he meant to the Pentagon seems a little strange. An attempt to change the subject from Russia to something else? Maybe. You have to admit, it is his style.

So, in my opinion, leave the TG's where they are in the military and allow others to join if they wish. Maybe let them serve in non-combat roles. But if they are willing to join, they are probably willing to fight if they have to.

[faltenrock]

As a CD from Germany, I still can't believe that the US administration banned all Transgender people from the army, this is 19th and 20th century, but not 2017! Terrible and horrible signal to the world.

[Rachelakld]

So here a story from the first females to live in barracks on my base

If one female looked at anothers boyfriend or girlfriend, often, later in the drying rooms, they would find their underwear cut in to hundreds of pieces by some unknown vindictive female in the barrack block.
Ever watched "desperate housewives" nasty like that, times 10.

I can't ever recall this sort of stuff happening in the males barracks (sure we used to fight, but it was settled in 30 seconds then we would be drinking again)

[Aunt Kelly]

Nice to hear from you again, Ilene. For that alone, I would like to buy a round for SCPO (ret) Beck. :)

Folks, I believe Georgette's tale is the kind of story that the Chairman of the Joint Chief's of Staff had in mind yesterday when stated, "There will be no modifications to the current policy..." Unless and until he receives an order, through proper channels (i.e. not Twitter), mission readiness will not be compromised by political grandstanding. Gen. Dunford has earned huge respect from me, publicly making a statement that could very well end his distinguished career. I trust his judgment. Everyone here should.

[Crystal 42]

I've never been in the military but I feel that anyone who is willing to put their life on the line for other people deserves respect. Whatever gender someone identifies with has nothing to do with their ability to do their job.

[SaraLin]

I was in the Army fro 72 through 76. I achieved a rank of E5, and carried a top secret clearance for much of that time. And yes, I do consider myself as being somewhere on the TG/TS spectrum.

Back then, there were NO protections for LGBTQ folks and being found out would have been the end of my military career. So- I kept my mouth shut and put my gender issues aside so that I could serve my country. It didn't take too long though to find that it was a lousy fit for me, so there was no way I was going to re-enlist. No, it wasn't the gender thing. I just found it very hard to be respectful to people based solely on the number of stripes (or the metal) they were wearing.

That said - I have mixed feelings about the TS/military combination. I can understand the difficulties of barracks life. I can understand why American taxpayers might not want to pay for military TS surgeries. I can even understand the confusion of "what uniform do I wear?" or "where to I sleep?"

But seriously folks, with some basic ground rules and limitations, why not? If the person applying is physically able, poses no security risk, and is willing (should the need arise) to fight and possibly die in defense of the country - then what difference does it truly make what gender they claim or what uniform they wear?

I think it's really less about the TS's fitness to serve and more about the UNfitness of the rest of the military in their unwillingness to handle anyone who is different. Remember, it wasn't that long ago when non-white or non-male also meant non-accepted, or at least kept separate.

The fight for "and justice for all" must continue, and bigots who attack the weak for personal gain should not allowed to be held unaccountable for their words/actions.

[Angie G]

I have mixed feelings about it. I don't think it would harm the military for them to serve but things like SRS should not be part of the package. And I thank every one here for there service.:hugs:
Angie

[Aunt Kelly]

So you can "...understand why American taxpayers might not want to pay for 'military TS surgeries'..."
Really? Given that the possible expense of treating this condition, which affects a tiny fraction of active duty and retired military, is infinitesimally small, and moreover, given that it is a treatable medical condition, just like appendicitis or... bone spurs, there is absolutely no reasonable rationale for denying it. Oh, lots of ignorant, bigoted reasons, but nothing that even approaches reasonable when considered dispassionately and with an effective understanding of the issues.

[SaraLin]

Aunt Kelly,

Yes, I said "I can understand why..." I didn't say that I agree. I understand that for the most part, the general public is ignorant of the realities of the TG/TS situation and easily led by the loud voices of intolerance and hatred. And while our voices are finally beginning to be heard, it's still a small voice trying to be heard over the shouting of so many others.

Just yesterday, I had someone comment, "they'll all be flocking to the military to get the surgery if we don't stop them". And this was from someone I thought should know better!

I understand the reality of the situation - and the reality of public sentiment.

Again, I never said that I agree.

IF the option had been available when I was in the service , I would have JUMPED on the chance. Who knows? I might have even served longer.

[michaelmichelle]

Well I have to say after spending 10 years in the Marines serving with the infantry the idea that this would not be a problem within a unit is total fantasy.
Now I'm not saying it would be a problem in any number of military jobs, because obviously it wouldn't be.
So do we make different rules for different positions?
The military as a whole and the Marines especially are not set up to be a kinder gentler world.
I remember when I enlisted being told....you will not have all the rights you do as a civilian.
Granted I served 74 to 84. But I don't think that part changed.

[Kate Simmons]

I was in Army Intel. I served two tours in Vietnam 1969-1971. :)

[Jenn A116]

I was in the Army 1970-72. Did a tour in 'Nam, got the usual honors. Held multiple MOS's 11B, 67A1F, 71L. left as an E5. Wasn't interested in saving all my stuff from that era but discovered a few years ago that my Mom had stashed them away. So, I've got several of the medals, but haven't displayed them anywhere.

[kimdl93]

Regular army, 72-74....all stateside.

To the OP, of course I support the thousands of TG who serve willingly and courageously (in a number of ways) whether they are out or in the closet. What's truly sad is that one person with an illadvised Twitter habit and a compulsion to demand attention would choose to use such honorable people as a political foil. Yet another illustration of how not to behave in private and public.

[GretchenM]

Yesterday it was reported that the military spends more money on paper than the estimated expense of providing medical services to the trans folks. This morning it was reported that the total estimated cost is, on the average 0.07% of the total budget. So where is the very high cost stated in the tweets? It would be more productive to cut paper purchases by 30% and put that into combat readiness. Facts do tend to put things in perspective except for those who do not wish to consider facts and go on opinions that may be based on cultural stereotypes and have no relation to the realities of the situation. Three cheers for Chairman of theh Joint Chiefs. Lets trust them and support them.

[Alice B]

I fully support transgender in the military. There are many jobs in the service besides direct combat and some can be fine in a combat role. I am more concerned that there could be negative fallout and a step backwards in acceptance of the transgender community because of what Trump has tweeted.

[Tahoegurl]

Hi all...I support the military and transgender rights. But if you have not been in the military in the last 2 years then you do not have a realistic view of the current environment. I am still in the military and not out of the closet. The past policy that was released was a joke. It was purely political. There was no direction or standards so it could not be followed. Last month the DoD asked for 6 more months to try and figure it out. There is a much bigger issue here beyond just saying let them serve. Where are you on selected service...still just males only...how many are calling their congressman on that...

[CD Tammy]

I can see both sides of this issue and will take none. I anticipate quite a bit of bashing so I will post something I recently read (I did not write it so don't attribute any quotes to me) that might bring a little balance...

Tracy, like you I see both sides of this issue. As a retired US Army officer, I can imagine what issues this presents to a unit commander. Here in the states it is one thing but what happens on a deployment? How does a unit commander keep a transgendered service member protected in Turkey, Syria, Iraq, Qatar, or other place where this is a crime? A quick solution is to limit transgender service to stateside and friendly nations but then the unit commander is faced with a non-deployable soldier which will impact readiness.

Can you imagine what would happen if a transgender was captured on the battlefield? I cannot think of a worse nightmare. Look what happened to MAJ Rhonda Cornu in ‘93 and what happened to SPC Melissa Rathbun-Nealy in ‘91.

Now on the other side of this. When I first went to Desert Shield, the Saudis treated our female soldiers as if they were lepers. This changed over the years. I watched a Saudi officer actual break from a group of disgusted men to shake the hand of a female specialist who, after an IED strike, assumed command of the patrol, and got everyone back to FOB. We were pinning a bronze star on her at a joint ceremony. Attitudes change. Women now serve in combat arms roles.

[reb.femme]

12 years in the RAF 81 - 93 (Propulsion Systems Tech). Phantom, Jaguar & Tornado GR1. Heart felt love of the military and always had this within me. Pics show the jet I worked with during Gulf War 1 (Mig Eater) in Tabuk, Saudi Arabia & Gulf medal.

[docrobbysherry]

I must admit I didn't enjoy MY tour of duty as much as Sherry did hers!:daydreaming:

280223

[5150 Girl]

I have not served, but what irritates me as a trans person is how the haters want to trot out Klinger as the poster child for trans in the military. Klinger was not trans, he was just running a scam. And running the scam openly I might add...

[Jane G]

No idea who klingers is/was. Any how, great thread, alas when I left the Royal Navy, they had not even got around to excepting women, let alone trans. I still work in the defence industry and so much has changed, but alas I still have the old prejudiced ingrained in me, so will remain hidden away & happy with it.

[Lorileah]

Well I have to say after spending 10 years in the Marines serving with the infantry the idea that this would not be a problem within a unit is total fantasy.
Now I'm not saying it would be a problem in any number of military jobs, because obviously it wouldn't be.


:thinking: Well, I am afraid you don't get the new military and especially the Marine Corps.
In 2013 Leon Panetta removed the military's ban on women serving in combat, overturning the 1994 rule. Panetta's decision gave the military services until January 2016 to seek special exceptions if they believed any positions must remain closed to women. The services had until May 2013 to draw up a plan for opening all units to women and until the end of 2015 to actually implement it.[24][25] In 2015 Joseph Dunford, the commandant of the Marine Corps, recommended that women be excluded from competing for certain front-line combat jobs.[26] That year a U.S. official confirmed that the Marine Corps had requested to keep some combat jobs open only to men.[27] However, in December 2015, Defense Secretary Ash Carter stated that starting in 2016 all combat jobs would open to women.[28] In March 2016, Ash Carter approved final plans from military service branches and the U.S. Special Operations Command to open all combat jobs to women, and authorized the military to begin integrating female combat soldiers "right away." But let me ask you since you were in the infantry and I suspect you were in combat, how often did you think about the person next to as far as their sexual preference or gender? If you did, I have to guess you weren't at risk of getting killed. You know that at this time there are many cis women training for Special Forces who have qualified above cis men for spots. You do know that there are many Transwomen who were (and probably are) in units like the Seals, Rangers, Special Operations Squadrons and probably your own beloved Raiders.

To paraphrase my DI "If you got time to think about getting laid, you ain't busy enough"

[Aunt Kelly]

Nailed it, Lorileah. When the work is actually getting done, nothing so trivial as gender matters in the least. If you've been there, you know.

I've already mentioned the first female professional firefighter in my department. In truth, it took some time for some of my peers to admit that, while she was not the strongest of us, she was far from the weakest, but it was her willingness to do anything that needed to be done for the mission that made her our sister.

In the Army, I served with a lot of women in my unit (medical). They were among the strongest women I have ever known, far stronger than most of the men I have ever known. Again, gender never mattered when lives were on the line, (Yes, a regular occurrence for us) and anyone who thought that true leadership required a penis was soon disabused of that notion.

For a couple of reasons, I remember the oath I took upon entry into the U.S. Army. It's the same one every service member takes (minor differences for enlisted and officers). Every single service member, regardless of gender, takes the same oath. Anyone... Anyone who questions the fitness of a man or woman willing to promise "to protect and defend The Constitution of The United States" has an incomplete understanding of that Constitution. It is not surprising then, that anyone who suggests that the transgendered are somehow unfit is similarly ignorant of the group dynamics involved.

I will also add that we have heard all these arguments about, morality, unit cohesiveness, morale, and "disruption" before; the exact same arguments. The only difference is the group that was judged to be too disruptive at that time were the African American service members, and it was Executive Order 9981 that scandalized so many Americans who were seeing their worldview challenged like never before in 1948. Fearful people will always find something to hate. Politicians will always exploit that. Resist.

[CarlaWestin]

I will always have had and will have unwavering support for all American and allied military members past, present and future.

[vicky_cd99_2]

This is where I am torn. While I salute anyone willing to step up and serve the country. I am not sure I would have had the same fire and anger in the gut that it took to be TACP had I been in transition or even accepted as a cross dresser. My only question is does it affect combat readiness and lethal effectiveness of the unit. If the leadership of the military says no than so be it. I know I might anger some with my opinion, I am sorry if I have. The one thing about the military is it operates on a different standard than any civilian company, and under a different set of laws. Like I said I am torn on this.

[Kelly DeWinter]

Thanks to all who served in a civilian capacity as well. Docrobbysherry, you would certainly do the USO proud.

... and to those who are torn as to wether someone who is TG would degrade the effectiveness of a unit because of special accommodations. The same thing was said of:
. Women in the Service
. Women in combat roles
. Gays and Lesbians
and recently
. disabled servicemen ( evaluated by a special board)

Bottom line is, if you can meet the requirements of the military you should be allowed to serve. The currently serving TG in the military have not asked for special accommodations or special treatment, they are asking to be allowed to serve.

[kimdl93]

I agree that this is an anti-{edit: political} smack, and at the same time, isn't this fundamental to who many of us...if not most...see ourselves, and isn't the latest tweetstorm, this time directed at TGs in the military, fair game for a good smack?

I don't pick on the weak. I served when called, as did many of us. I don't apologize for being appalled by what has transpired.

To the issue of being torn. We in America like to think we are exceptional...I suppose as in better than everyone else. And yet it seems, what we really mean is we should be allow the exception. There's abundant evidence from throughout the world that integrating gay and TG persons into the military is no big deal. And but for some tweets with no clear purpose beyond appealing to bigotry, our miliary has been on a path to catch up with the rest of the world.

Remember our miliary was once fully integrated. Then, sometime around the Jim Crow era, it was segregated, and stayed that way till the early 50's. I won't attempt to recount the full story, but the bottom line is that, from Jackie Robinson on, serving in the military, serving the country has earned minorities the right of inclusion in society. One man's twitter feed should not be allowed to diminish that tradition.

[Paige Dehart]

My son is currently serving. He has been to Iraq, Afghanistan, Korea and Qatar. My daughter in-law, his wife, also served she was in Afghanistan twice. At 5ft. 5 in. and 120 lbs. her weapon was the 50 cal. not a light weight weapon.
Now what I fail to understand is how, if they can serve and do so with honor in wartime situations, suddenly a transgender person is unqualified to serve simply because they are transgender.
It is highly offensive to say that a person is not fit to serve, not due to lack of ability, but only because they are transgender.

I can say honestly that as a mother I don’t care if the person watching my son's back is transgender or anything else so long as he/she is a good soldier, a good shot, and preforms his/her duty with diligence, and care for his/her fellow soldier. I can also say for a fact that both my son and daughter in-law feel the same way.

For those who have served I can only say you have my respect and gratitude and thanks for your service.

[Aunt Kelly]

This is where I am torn. While I salute anyone willing to step up and serve the country. I am not sure I would have had the same fire and anger in the gut that it took to be TACP had I been in transition or even accepted as a cross dresser. My only question is does it affect combat readiness and lethal effectiveness of the unit. If the leadership of the military says no than so be it.
Asked and answered. Over and over. Only the face of the "disruptive element" has changed. Fear and ignorance has simply found a new thing to fret about.

[vicky_cd99_2]

I get where you are coming from. I am just going on my personal time in. I had a drive and determination to suppress that thing "I thought was wrong". I also had an internal anger that fueled my aggression and motivation to complete tasks assigned to me that most service members aren't assigned. I am a more mellow person after accepting who and what I am. I don't even hunt anymore since coming out. That drive to prove my machismo is not there. And that is what fueled me to succeed in the mission. My effectiveness would have changed. I still have the want to succeed but not by stepping on you to get there. I salute anyone willing to step up and wear the uniform. My reasons for questioning or torment if you will is from my personal time in not what others say.

[Lorileah]

In light of current events, I see this thread as pertinent to this community. Specific swipes at political parties and those who lead or belong to said parties won't be allowed. While some see this as anti________ others see it as pro-Trans. So let's keep it middle of the road without aiming towards a specific party or person. Thanks

[Kelly DeWinter]

The Pentagon has continued with integration plans and has come out with what appears to be tacit support for those currently serving.

[GretchenJ]

This thread is antipolitical smack disguised as patriotism. I thought that wasn't allowed except in the Media forum.

I consider this to be a thread about policy, which is tied to the administration which is supporting it.

To summarize how wrong this decision is, and how blatantly discriminatory it is, I offer you these four quotes. You decide

a) Our military must be focused on decisive and overwhelming victory and cannot be burdened with the tremendous medical costs and disruption that [sic] they in the military would entail


B) This policy would “seriously impair the morale of the Army at a time when our armed forces should be at their strongest and most efficient.”


C)During the brief period of time when they’re being socialized into the ethos of the military, it’s counterproductive to have [sic] them train together. The attraction and distraction of sexuality is detracting from the effectiveness of basic training.

D)“The problem of having them serve openly, is the extent to which it becomes a divisive cleavage point in small units.”


Answers:

a) "official" declaration of transgender ban via Twitter- 2017

b) U.S. Sen. Lister Hill of Alabama argued that integration of African Americans - 1947

c) Roscoe Bartlett (R-Md.) on discussing the issues of having women serve in the military -1997

d) A retired Army colonel said during a hearing on the issue in of having gays serve in the military - 1993

[5150 Girl]

No idea who klingers is/was. Any how, great thread, alas when I left the Royal Navy, they had not even got around to excepting women, let alone trans. I still work in the defence industry and so much has changed, but alas I still have the old prejudiced ingrained in me, so will remain hidden away & happy with it.

Corporal Maxwell Q. Klinger (later promoted to Sargent) was a character on a comedy show here in the states. It was set in a mobile army surgical hospital, during the Korean War, hence the name of the show, M*A*S*H.... The actor who played the role was almost as hairy as an ape. His story line was that he hated being in the Army so much he wore dresses in hopes that he would be deemed crazy and given a section 8 discharge.

[mykell]

280335

we need a like button or something for this below....


I consider this to be a thread about policy, which is tied to the administration which is supporting it.

To summarize how wrong this decision is, and how blatantly discriminatory it is, I offer you these four quotes. You decide

a) Our military must be focused on decisive and overwhelming victory and cannot be burdened with the tremendous medical costs and disruption that [sic] they in the military would entail


B) This policy would “seriously impair the morale of the Army at a time when our armed forces should be at their strongest and most efficient.”


C)During the brief period of time when they’re being socialized into the ethos of the military, it’s counterproductive to have [sic] them train together. The attraction and distraction of sexuality is detracting from the effectiveness of basic training.

D)“The problem of having them serve openly, is the extent to which it becomes a divisive cleavage point in small units.”


Answers:

a) "official" declaration of transgender ban via Twitter- 2017

b) U.S. Sen. Lister Hill of Alabama argued that integration of African Americans - 1947

c) Roscoe Bartlett (R-Md.) on discussing the issues of having women serve in the military -1997

d) A retired Army colonel said during a hearing on the issue in of having gays serve in the military - 1993

[Ceera]

I volunteered to serve in the US Navy back in 1975. The Vietnam War had just ended, but if it had lasted another 6 months I could have been drafted for combat service.

I served as a Data Systems Technician, and I was a third class petty officer aboard a guided missile cruiser. I saw duty in the Medeteranian, Atlantic and Pacific. I gave it my best effort, and even got a letter of commendation.

Back then, the concept of 'transgender' barely existed in public thought. We heard of the tennis star Renee Richards' sex change, and of musician Walter Carlos becoming Wendy Carlos, but they were exceptions. Generally, someone who cross dressed was believed by the public to be either an entertainer going for laughs, or a 'kinky transvestite'. I knew I was bi, but was deeply in denial and trying to 'play it straight'. But I just did not do well living in close quarters with other males. Decades later I would realize that had been my feminine aspect rebelling about undressing in front of a crowd of men. At the time, the conclusion was, "You're gay but you did your best and never caused trouble", and they gave me an honorable discharge.

In today's military, not counting the orange one's ranting tweets that have yet to become official policy, I could probably have acknowledged being MtF Trans, and found a way to continue to serve, but as a woman.

[Tina_gm]

While I disagree or will if it becomes official, which a tweet is not BTW- of a full ban of TG in the military, I wish to express some of my thoughts and opinions on the subject.

1st I served in the USAF 1983-1986. Just so that it be known that I have an idea of what military life is about. My main belief about serving in the military is the essence of the word, to serve. We are there to serve, not to be served. It is currently a voluntary service, no longer a draft, so we currently are not made to be in the service.

As I stated, I disagree with a general ban on TG serving, BUT- what I believe the U.S. military should not be made to do is accommodate someone with any transgender issues. In other words, the military should not have to spend money on a members transition. They should not have to make any special exemptions to a member for their issues such as which uniforms they wear, that they should be able to grow their hair long etc etc due to their gender issues or their daily identity issues. If someone goes into the military and decides its just more than a passing fancy of CDing and it's time for transition, It is not the military's responsibility to them to have it done, or to accommodate them with not only the money spent doing so but the time spent away from active duty for surgery and treatment etc etc.

It is not about whether or not any one person can or can't. It is about readiness. If a person is going through the life changes of transition, or that their gender issues makes them not able to perform on a daily basis of a particular job because one day or the next they are not feeling male or female, they should not be awarded multiple jobs or an extra wardrobe of uniforms for their current or daily changing identity.

A person who has fully transitioned, surgically, legally can and should be able to serve. CDers can still CD, but not while on duty. And as anyone, which is part of the readiness aspect, be prepared to be called into action at any moment. As a soldier, sailor or airmen, you are so 24/7.

So, yes, I believe that a person who if they wish to serve and identifies as TG can still serve, but as is essence with the word serve, that is what they are there to do, not be served for their TG issues.

[Eva Bella]

This is an awesome post GretchenJ. It's just too easy to be complacent and ignore the study of history. Our country has been here before

[Kelly DeWinter]

GretchenJ;

Right on Point. People have to understand that the decision as to who can and cannot serve is about Policy.

In that note:

Admiral Paul Zukunft, the Commandant of the United States Coast Guard instructed his office to reach out to the 13 Coast Guardsmen that have self-identified as transgender. and said ‘I will not turn my back. We have made an investment in you, and you have made an investment in the Coast Guard, and I will not break faith.'”

[Aunt Kelly]

Thanks for sharing Admiral Zukunft's words, Kelly. They are the words of a true leader, one who has earned the trust and respect of his subordinates. Every last one of our service men and women deserve no less.

[josie_S]

US Army 13B 94-97

[Teresa]

Gendermutt,
I'm sorry but you are wrong with these comments.

The first point is although Marcelle no longer contributes in the forum she gave us a blow by blow account of being accepted by the Canadian army as a TS . There are increasing numbers in transition in the UK forces , the cost of training is far greater than the cost of accommodating them , all the forces and public services are now realsing this point . The other side issue is giving them assistance often avoids self harm or suicide . Besides they can't now discriminate by law .

The point about being there to serve and not be served, now days service life is considered a career , it's a job for which you you receive a wage, and like any employer now they are bound by the same employment guidelines.

[Tina_gm]

If you read my post I'm not objecting to tg in the service. I remain firm on my belief about issues such as transition while serving, or making exceptions and exemptions based on a person being tg. What other countries do imo doesn't make it better, ok or correct simply because. The argument of well this country does xyz, so we should too. It may work for one country or group of people but not necessarily another.

The military has always had career options and it's members have always received paychecks and other benefits for their service.

Lastly, being a voluntary service, and in any voluntary employment, my belief is that the employer gets to make whatever rules it wishes to and if a person desires to work for them, they should abide by those rules. Dress codes, behavior standards, pretty much anything.

[Aunt Kelly]

When you're discriminating because of things that people can not choose, no. You do not get to make whatever rules you wish. And the argument isn't that it's the right thing to do because other countries do it. It's an argument that we stand out as backwards and puritanical, yet again, because we don't treat all of our citizens with the respect that they deserve.

[Bobbi46]

Really this comes down to administrative discrimination, what is going to happen to the gay/lesbian and non transition serving people? are they going to be shown the door. Surely it should come down to whether one can do the job they were assigned to do properly irrespective of their gender and if they can then why bar them from being in that job or barring them from applying for those jobs in the first place?
I don't want to sound political but surely himself in the white house is guilty of gender discrimination.

[Kelly DeWinter]

These are public photos of openly serving Transgender Service members. Look closely at some of the medals they have honorably earned. Just wanted to show that TG service members are not a burden to the military and deserve support.
280667280668280669

[Sheren Kelly]

I previously posted my pic in the "Who We Are" forum on 28 July: post 4127363
Those were my decorations from my Navy career.

[Kelly DeWinter]

Update

Some of the Military Branches are starting to close ranks in support of Transgender Service Members

First the Coastguard and Now the Navy. Hopefully the other Branches of the Military will support their Service Members soon.

"U.S. Navy Secretary Richard V. Spencer said he would follow directions from the president on transgender people in the military but believes "any patriot" should be allowed to serve."

[Kelsey dresses]

Ok as a vet, are they saying you can't dress at all off duty I assume or is it when you are working or on duty you must be dressed in uniform no exceptions period. Or are they saying you can't be a corporal klinger.

[Nikkilovesdresses]

The military ...is for defeating foreign and domestic enemies who want to destroy us, and take us captive.

Isn't the military primarily for defence?

I'd like to thank all military, ex and serving, members who have put themselves in harm's way to protect us. You are frequently treated appallingly and with ingratitude, by politicians who've never worn a uniform. You deserve great respect.

[Kelly DeWinter]

Ok as a vet, are they saying you can't dress at all off duty I assume or is it when you are working or on duty you must be dressed in uniform no exceptions period. Or are they saying you can't be a corporal klinger.


It's really hard to say right now, there are some service members who dress according to their gender identity with the support of their commands, their are others who do not receive support. Defense Secretary Mathias has held up implementing President Trump's ban until a review is completed and he get's further guidance from the white house. What this means for TG service members is anyone's guess. It's the first time to my knowledge that an Executive Order has been technically disobeyed, be i could be wrong.

[Stephanie47]

I already wrote to my United States Senators and indicated Trump's edicts should not stand. This is nothing more than discrimination against a certain segment of society. In the military it is a case as to whether any soldier, sailor, airman or woman, or marine is fit to serve in any military occupation specialty. It will be interesting to see how this all develops. It is one thing to deny enlistments to otherwise qualified men and women. It is another to discharge currently servicing men and women who are meeting all standards, especially since it is a volunteer military. It is be interesting to see what develops since those serving signed contracts with their service branches. And, how will those who signed reenlistment papers with the service branch fully knowing he or she is transgender be treated? Service members come under the Uniform Code of Military Justice. How will an executive order from the commander-in-chief supercede the UCMJ when gays, lesbians and transgender men and women meet the standards of the service.

Me? 11B20, US Army 1960-1971, Viet Nam, Purple Heart with Oak Leaf Cluster

[rian]

i declare my support to the TG's military ....i think this is very courageous to be one and yet be taking all the pressure serving the country ....love you girls

[Juanita O]

i served in the Air Force from 78-82. Most of your allies around the world allow transgender people to serve and they have on problems.