• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Trump - No transgender individuals in the military

Argumemnon said:
Right. You know, there _may_ be an argument that women can't perform physical tasks that men can, but trans people? What has trans got to do with strength or martial prowess?
Click to expand...

There aren't any safe spaces in a foxhole*


* I think I'm getting the hang of it now...
 
Argumemnon said:
It's only a fallacy when it's an appeal to an authority NOT in the relevant field. As a longstanding member of this forum I would've thought you'd know this.
Click to expand...

We've had the argument before about the "appeal to authority" label, but it's also a fallacy to assert that something is true because an authority says it's true.
 
I totally disagree with Trump on this one. The only question should be, "can they do a job that the military needs done?" If they answer is, "yes," and they meet the physical qualifications then that's all we really need to know.

Although. . .I applied for the Navy once. Met all the physical requirements and scored highly on the ASVAB. I was turned down because I was already married with a kid. It seems to me that the military has long been averse to taking recruits who are going to cost them more money to take on. I can see it from that angle, but I still think it's wrongheaded. These are people, like me, who want to serve their country. Why not let them?
 
xjx388 said:
I totally disagree with Trump on this one. The only question should be, "can they do a job that the military needs done?" If they answer is, "yes," and they meet the physical qualifications then that's all we really need to know.

Although. . .I applied for the Navy once. Met all the physical requirements and scored highly on the ASVAB. I was turned down because I was already married with a kid. It seems to me that the military has long been averse to taking recruits who are going to cost them more money to take on. I can see it from that angle, but I still think it's wrongheaded. These are people, like me, who want to serve their country. Why not let them?
Click to expand...

Served in the Navy for 6 years, the worst sea story I have heard, first person from a friend with the same NEC as I had, was a guy who did two 11 month deployments with a 3 day pass in between.

The Navy is hard on the marriage life, lots of divorce.

Consider yourself lucky.
 
bobdroege7 said:
Served in the Navy for 6 years, the worst sea story I have heard, first person from a friend with the same NEC as I had, was a guy who did two 11 month deployments with a 3 day pass in between.

The Navy is hard on the marriage life, lots of divorce.

Consider yourself lucky.
Click to expand...

I get it; my Dad was Navy for 26 years. I grew up seeing him very rarely until he retired when I was in Middle School. I know it was hard on their marriage.
 
WilliamSeger said:
We've had the argument before about the "appeal to authority" label, but it's also a fallacy to assert that something is true because an authority says it's true.
Click to expand...

But that's not what Cleon and Quadra wrote. They hinted that generals might know something about running the military, not that something is true because they said so.
 
Sometimes there is also no "always and forever" answer. Today's military is a lot more than being able to ride a horse and wield a bayonet. There are a lot of positions doing different things and requiring different skills. During DADT we were ousting some Arabic translators. How did that contribute to "winning"?

In addition, today's culture - both in and out of the military - is different than it was, say, 200 years ago. What might not have worked at some time in the past may be feasible now.

Legal thinking on the Twitter Trans Policy is that it would be an uphill battle for DJT to win in court. So much winning. I'm getting tired of the winning.
 
Meadmaker said:
The British military discourages, but does not prohibit, transgenders from joining the military until their surgical transformation is complete.
Click to expand...

I'm not knowledgeable enough about the issues to say for certain whether or not that's a perfect policy, but it sounds pretty reasonable to me. It seems like the sort of thing you might do if you were genuinely concerned with transgender integration for operational and performance reasons rather than just looking for an excuse to discriminate.
 
Argumemnon said:
Right. You know, there _may_ be an argument that women can't perform physical tasks that men can, but trans people? What has trans got to do with strength or martial prowess?
Click to expand...

If they're female-to-male, then testosterone treatment should increase strength relative to most women, but bone structure and neuromuscular efficiency will still lag behind biological males. If they're male-to-female, then estrogen treatment will impair muscular strength. In both cases, one should expect transsexuals undergoing medical transition to be somewhere between men and women in physical capability and strength. And that matters, not just in combat but in many support riles as well. Exactly how much it matters, and what to do about it, is a topic that has been discussed at length in the women in combat threads. It is still relevant to transsexuals, but not more so than to women.
 
I'm going to admit something that I am ashamed of.

I am uncomfortable with transgender people. The same is true with male homosexuals.

But the problem isn't them, It's me. They have a right to live their lives in a way that makes them happy. And I have no right to interfere with their happiness. Their lives are hard enough enduring tremendous stigma. Live and let live.
 
quadraginta said:
The individuals, cis, trans, or whatever, still each have to demonstrate that they can qualify for the requirements of the job, so this is irrelevant.
Click to expand...

No, it's not irrelevant. For most positions in the military, the standards for men and women are different (though I don't think they should be). So it definitely still matters for trans. Just not more than it does for women.
 
acbytesla said:
I'm going to admit something that I am ashamed of.

I am uncomfortable with transgender people. The same is true with male homosexuals.
Click to expand...

There is no reason to be ashamed of how you feel. Your actions are the only thing anyone is ever entitled to judge you on.
 
acbytesla said:
I'm going to admit something that I am ashamed of.

I am uncomfortable with transgender people. The same is true with male homosexuals.

But the problem isn't them, It's me. They have a right to live their lives in a way that makes them happy. And I have no right to interfere with their happiness. Their lives are hard enough enduring tremendous stigma. Live and let live.
Click to expand...

You need a couple gay friends. You could get over your reaction if you got to know some people.
 
WilliamSeger said:
We've had the argument before about the "appeal to authority" label, but it's also a fallacy to assert that something is true because an authority says it's true.
Click to expand...

It’s a fallacy to say anything is true save conclusions based of valid deductive logic and true predicates. Few if any real world questions can be answered this way so demands for truth are almost invariably straw-men or red herrings.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom