Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 52

Thread: Army Eases Ban on Transgendered Soldiers

  1. #31
    Senior Member meatbringer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    murica
    Posts
    251
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by FLAPS View Post
    You're right, these conversations can't be had, especially when you label someone with an opposing opinion as an "uncomfortable, scared crank." Then again, that's what some people do...shut down the discussion with name calling. Stay classy
    I didn't realize you had beaten up trans people. What made you think I was talking about you? Oh well, it's not like you would bring anything relevant or factual to the table anyways.

  2. #32
    Senior Member meatbringer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    murica
    Posts
    251
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by USN - Retired View Post
    Then wouldn't a genetic/biological female (i.e. born female) soldier be "demolished" in hand-to-hand combat against a genetic/biological male soldier "due to higher T levels, larger frame and muscle structure, etc" of the genetic/biological male soldier?
    That all depends. Possibly. Also, don't forget that we allow females to work in combat positions as well, so your point is moot.

  3. #33
    Administrator Mjölnir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Norfolk, VA
    Posts
    2,965
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by USN - Retired View Post
    Then wouldn't a genetic/biological female (i.e. born female) soldier be "demolished" in hand-to-hand combat against a genetic/biological male soldier "due to higher T levels, larger frame and muscle structure, etc" of the genetic/biological male soldier?
    More often than not a genetic male who went through puberty will have higher muscle mass, bone density etc. Whether or not a female would get demolished by a genetic male ... maybe, depends on training. Brute strength doesn't always overcome good training when it comes to fighting / combatives. I have seen a straight / 'normal' male beaten by a female in combatives training before ... it isn't the norm ... but the opposite isn't absolute.

    The Marines did an initial study on females in the infantry and in the pilot classes at SOI (School of Infantry) that had females, the females didn't do well. The Marines went back and looked at why, then retooled female boot camp to better prepare female recruits / Marines-to-be for SOI and the pass rate (not numbers, but raw percentage) now match that of males -- without a change in the standard to graduate. Infantry Officers' School (IOC) still sees a pretty high failure rate for females. The Marines made the women rise to the standard ... they did.

    BT BT

    A couple of different thought streams here:

    Transgender in the military: No study shows that it would impact readiness, lethality etc. All the Service Chiefs, the prior SECDEF (Mattis), the military Surgeons General all testified that service by transgender members would not have a negative impact. POTUS reinstated the ban with some exceptions ... that is his prerogative, but it wasn't based on anything other than playing to a base for politics ... I don't think it will hold up long term. The questions should be if the person can do the job. Someone who isn't displaying adverse mental health issues shouldn't be barred from service if they can do the job; gender dysphoria alone isn't adverse / doesn't impact that ability to do the job.

    Transgender in sports: I don't think this is really fair. As was said earlier, once a genetic male undergoes puberty, he will have a higher muscle mass, bone density etc. Testosterone inhibitors, estrogen etc. will curb some of that 'advantage' ... but not all of it. At these competitive levels, this type of advantage isn't fair nor keeping with what I think 'sport' is about.

    Is a transgender female a 'real' female / transgender male a 'real' male: IMO no. But if she / 'she' wants to be treated like a female, called she, called Brenda vice Bob ... it doesn't impact me to do so in any way ... no more than a guy whose name is Robert and wants to be called Bob, or whose name is Thomas Joseph Smith and wants to be called TJ.
    The most important six inches on the battlefield ... is between your ears.

  4. #34
    Administrator Mjölnir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Norfolk, VA
    Posts
    2,965
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by USN - Retired View Post
    Then wouldn't a genetic/biological female (i.e. born female) soldier be "demolished" in hand-to-hand combat against a genetic/biological male soldier "due to higher T levels, larger frame and muscle structure, etc" of the genetic/biological male soldier?
    More often than not a genetic male who went through puberty will have higher muscle mass, bone density etc. Whether or not a female would get demolished by a genetic male ... maybe, depends on training. Brute strength doesn't always overcome good training when it comes to fighting / combatives. I have seen a straight / 'normal' male beaten by a female in combatives training before ... it isn't the norm ... but the opposite isn't absolute.

    The Marines did an initial study on females in the infantry and in the pilot classes at SOI (School of Infantry) that had females, the females didn't do well. The Marines went back and looked at why, then retooled female boot camp to better prepare female recruits / Marines-to-be for SOI and the pass rate (not numbers, but raw percentage) now match that of males -- without a change in the standard to graduate. Infantry Officers' School (IOC) still sees a pretty high failure rate for females. The Marines made the women rise to the standard ... they did.

    BT BT

    A couple of different thought streams here:

    Transgender in the military: No study shows that it would impact readiness, lethality etc. All the Service Chiefs, the prior SECDEF (Mattis), the military Surgeons General all testified that service by transgender members would not have a negative impact. POTUS reinstated the ban with some exceptions ... that is his prerogative, but it wasn't based on anything other than playing to a base for politics ... I don't think it will hold up long term. The questions should be if the person can do the job. Someone who isn't displaying adverse mental health issues shouldn't be barred from service if they can do the job; gender dysphoria alone isn't adverse / doesn't impact that ability to do the job.

    Transgender in sports: I don't think this is really fair. As was said earlier, once a genetic male undergoes puberty, he will have a higher muscle mass, bone density etc. Testosterone inhibitors, estrogen etc. will curb some of that 'advantage' ... but not all of it. At these competitive levels, this type of advantage isn't fair nor keeping with what I think 'sport' is about.

    Is a transgender female a 'real' female / transgender male a 'real' male: IMO no. But if she / 'she' wants to be treated like a female, called she, called Brenda vice Bob ... it doesn't impact me to do so in any way ... no more than a guy whose name is Robert and wants to be called Bob, or whose name is Thomas Joseph Smith and wants to be called Tom, Joe or TJ.
    The most important six inches on the battlefield ... is between your ears.

  5. #35
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Posts
    131
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Mjölnir View Post
    Transgender in sports: I don't think this is really fair. As was said earlier, once a genetic male undergoes puberty, he will have a higher muscle mass, bone density etc. Testosterone inhibitors, estrogen etc. will curb some of that 'advantage' ... but not all of it. At these competitive levels, this type of advantage isn't fair nor keeping with what I think 'sport' is about.

    Is a transgender female a 'real' female / transgender male a 'real' male: IMO no. But if she / 'she' wants to be treated like a female, called she, called Brenda vice Bob ... it doesn't impact me to do so in any way ... no more than a guy whose name is Robert and wants to be called Bob, or whose name is Thomas Joseph Smith and wants to be called Tom, Joe or TJ.
    It's actually refreshing to read someone's response in such a clear, concise manner. None of this multiple paragraphs of goobly-gook that beat around the answer, defer it to a "school board" or" committee," etc.

    You'd make a horrible politician, since you have this habit of getting straight to the point and putting your opinion up front and center.

  6. #36
    Senior Member USN - Retired's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Ewa Beach, Hawaii
    Posts
    702
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Mjölnir View Post
    The Marines did an initial study on females in the infantry and in the pilot classes at SOI (School of Infantry) that had females, the females didn't do well. The Marines went back and looked at why, then retooled female boot camp to better prepare female recruits / Marines-to-be for SOI and the pass rate (not numbers, but raw percentage) now match that of males -- without a change in the standard to graduate. Infantry Officers' School (IOC) still sees a pretty high failure rate for females. The Marines made the women rise to the standard ... they did.
    Counterpoint:

    https://www.manhattan-institute.org/...n-combat-units
    As Libertarians, we seek a world of liberty; a world in which all individuals are sovereign over their own lives and no one is forced to sacrifice his or her values for the benefit of others

  7. #37
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Columbus, ohio
    Posts
    3,327
    Mentioned
    29 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by meatbringer View Post
    Garhkal, the "WND" article has nothing to do with sports and transgender. Also, the "Infowars" article you posted talks about harassment for bathroom usage. Are we still talking about transgender participation in sports, or are we switching gears? Just checking. We need the facts about said "harassment" before crucifying anyone over anything. I commend you on actually citing an article; however, please note that the only thing you could come up with is "Infowars": the conspiracy theory/nut job right wing outlet that says Hillary ran a sex slave ring, Sandy Hook was fake, some yogurts make you gay, and chem trails and "gay bombs" are thing to worry about.

    Anyways, the "Infowars article" (lol) states that children complaining about a school policy/state law were threatened with hate crime charges. What was said or done by these students, and was there harassment? It's Infowars, man....

    The truth is that I don't really feel it's fair or unfair in each case, as it depends on the sport, persons involved, etc. The bathroom issue? Well, once again countries around the world laugh at us as we cry about "problems" that no one else sees as a problem. Plenty of other developed countries have unisex bathrooms or transgender policies in place that allow them to use the bathroom of their identified gender. Zero issues worth noting.
    Well since both were on about the same High school, and DID say to the students that they'd get booted of the team (as per the part i quoted), if they kept complaining, yes i DO see that as relevant..

  8. #38
    Senior Member meatbringer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    murica
    Posts
    251
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by garhkal View Post
    Well since both were on about the same High school, and DID say to the students that they'd get booted of the team (as per the part i quoted), if they kept complaining, yes i DO see that as relevant..
    You stated that the students were going to be kicked off for complaining about trans in sports, then you cited (Infowars) about students and harassment regarding the bathroom issue, and that students were threatened with being punished if harassment continued. It's not really the same, is it? No kids were threatened with being kicked off the team over the sports debate, as you initially stated. And now we find out that the story is false...

    And for the record, I don't agree with it if that were actually the case; however, please don't take too much offense to me being skeptical, especially since all you could find to "support" your view is the right wing nut job conspiracy outlet, Infowars. And now, as Mjolinr has pointed out, the Infowars article was a sham (just like every other Infowars story). Nice....

    About a dozen articles of credible scientific research and findings = "left wing crying"
    A debunked Infowars article containing nothing but hearsay = Proof!
    lol
    Last edited by meatbringer; 05-22-2019 at 07:37 AM.

  9. #39
    Senior Member meatbringer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    murica
    Posts
    251
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by FLAPS View Post
    It's actually refreshing to read someone's response in such a clear, concise manner. None of this multiple paragraphs of goobly-gook that beat around the answer, defer it to a "school board" or" committee," etc.

    You'd make a horrible politician, since you have this habit of getting straight to the point and putting your opinion up front and center.
    I simply said to consider all variables (info Mjolnir posted) and leave each case up to the people tasked with making such decisions. Sorry you need every single little detail spelled out for you to ignore anyways. Also, Mjolnir cited research and analysis, so I know you don't like that "liberal crying" science stuff.

    Let's not forget that I posted about a dozen different scientific articles stating exactly what Mjolnir cited, per your request, just for you to ignore them and start with name calling and dumb jokes, then you get riled up when I state that people are beating up trans people.
    Last edited by meatbringer; 05-21-2019 at 10:40 PM.

  10. #40
    Administrator Mjölnir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Norfolk, VA
    Posts
    2,965
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by USN - Retired View Post
    A couple of things I think that article doesn't explain well (purposely or not?):

    1. The article points out the 2015 study and the poor results, but ignores the steps the Marine Corps took after the 2015 study and the results (equal passing percentages at the School of Infantry -- SOI for enlisted Marines.). If your information cutoff for WWII is Dec 8th 1941, we lost the war.

    2. The event discussed at Infantry Officers' School is the CET (Combat Endurance Test). It was never a formalized / codified event -- I was an instructor there for 2 summer cycles. The CET is the initial gut check at IOC and the major reason / justification for changing it was that the standards for the event far exceeded the Mission Essential Tasks, Enabling Learning Objectives and Terminal Learning objectives for IOC. An Infantry Officer candidate could meet all the codified and expected levels of fitness & competence for an Infantry Officer, and not pass the CET. It turned out that the CET 'standard' was a moving bar standard that changed with each IOC Commanding Officer and was not approved by TECOM (the USMC Training and Education Command). IOC made it a non graded event since it did not have a formal function reflected by the approved training standards.

    What I think the article should have expanded on:

    1. Yes, there have been issues with females integrating into traditionally all male units. I have observed this, and seen it lessen over the years ... people have to get used to something new. Additionally, when I was deployed in Afghanistan and Iraq, my team had females assigned and there were no issues, my last deployment on a DDG saw exactly zero surprise pregnancies, male / female relation issues etc. Why? Leadership. Good leaders will make the expectation & standards of behavior very clear, will enforce them, and hold accountable those that fall short. The recent firing of the CO of USS FLORIDA is a prime example. Sailors maintained and distributed spreadsheets called / file name a “rape list” on the ship’s network. He list detailed female members of the crew and what sex acts people most wanted to see them perform — the CO found out about it from the Senior Enlisted and did nothing. Unprofessional is unprofessional ... and not the fault of the female crew members; while this may be short of criminal ... it is clearly unprofessional and violates the official use policy.


    If I had a subordinate leader who came to me and stated they couldn't lead an integrated team ... I would question their ability to lead ... we already have cracked the code on getting a black kid from Harlem, a white kid from Mississippi, an Asian kid from California etc. to work as a cohesive team ... working past racial, cultural and other issues ... gender issues are not different. As a PltSgt, Divo, Department Head, XO & CO ... I have lost more readiness to DUIs than I have gender relations ... should we just ban alcohol for everyone ... or find a way to lead?
    The most important six inches on the battlefield ... is between your ears.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •