Dissent from the new orthodoxy, Volume I Transgenders and new military polices.
So, rumour has it that President Trump has banned Transgenders from joining the military...Everyone's freaking out, time for some common sense, let's start with the obvious: a. Being in the military isn't a right for anyone. Thank goodness within the US the Military is voluntary. In other places, one is forced to join the military against their will. So, someone will, of course, have the audacity to ask, if someone wishes to serve their country in this manner, why not let them? Should not be equal opportunity be granted to anyone who asks?
To be in the military requires both physical and emotional fitness and readiness. We don't cry discrimination when disabled people are excluded from the military. Why is this? Well, it's rather obvious is it not? A fighting force needs to be mobile, and able to move quickly or move in case of the enemy attacking. A person who is disabled would have a difficult time doing this quickly or efficiently. I'm sure there are many disabled people who would love to serve our country's military, (Actually, believe it or not, I was going to be hired to be a nuclear physicist for the Navy out of HS, however, I got hit by a car and became legally disabled, thus ended that opportunity)....Could they serve in other capacities? Yes, but fighting on the front lines would be an absolute no no. But one doesn't realise that those positions that are "undeployable" TM, are few and far between. Being in the military, one could be on the move at a moment's notice. For a disabled person, it would be a rather difficult task, and extra accommodations would have to be made...And for a force that needs to be mobile, there's little time to have the accommodations ready in time. There are of course disabled people that serve in the military that got disabled via battle, or within the military complex, and accommodations and things are done for them according to their need. So we can't say that the military hates disabled people, or strictly discriminates.
So what does that have to do with transgender people? The simple answer is this, they proclaim to be a sex which they are not. This would be something that would apply more for those who go from female to male, rather than the other way...but the point, if they think they are male, they should be judged according to the male standards for the physical fitness tests, which would self-exclude the vast majority of those applying to join our nation's military. (There would, of course, be a certain percentage that could pass). For males going to female, they'll easily pass (well, the vast majority) the female standards for admission. There is, of course, also a psychological examination as well, which the question could be asked, if the person is confused as to which gender they are, what else could they possibly be confused about? (The other thing that would have excluded me from the military is that my mum recently passed during that time, and I was very emotionally unstable at the time)....One needs to be able to do the orders of the military, if one is ordered to kill the enemy, one must be able to do it at the drop of a hat, and any traumatic experience may make that a difficult task, if not near impossible task. You can't when preparing to shoot the enemy have a breakdown moment and cry over some past trauma or painful experience and place oneself in more danger than one is already in.....I believe it to be fair for the military to have people that are emotionally stable and prepared to do the task assigned to them. b. But, Joe, there are already transgenders serving in the military, should they be kicked out?
No, they should be allowed to finish their terms of service that they have signed up for, and have their records looked at on an individual basis, and their renewal of terms, based upon what they have done in the service, not based upon transgenderism, or what not.
c. But what if the transgendered person passes both the physical and psychological evaluations?
These things should be handled on a case by case basis, as it was done beforehand. There doesn't need to be a media circus surrounding these decisions. I feel the same about homosexuals in our military, these things should be handled on a case by case basis. There are many situations, where certain types of people are banned from having a certain job or what not, but, there are case-by-case exemptions made for particular individuals. Just like a job that has a certain qualification level, but employers make exceptions on occasion, I believe the same should happen for our military, there doesn't need to be an open door policy, but things need to be looked at on an individual basis.
d. In conclusion, supposedly
I'd love to be able to say, that LGBT whatever rights are being taken way, but since when is joining the military a right? They correctly make discriminations based upon all kinds of factors, from physical to emotional, and those standards should be applied equally.
As I say always, In situations where there is actual discrimination in a negative sense, or one's inalienable rights are not being allowed to be exercised, I will, of course, support these kinds of situations in terms of rights, no one has a right to take a gun away from you for being homosexual or trans. AKA, I don't support stoning people to death because they've made this particular kind of decision. I don't wish to see people jailed for doing this kind of thing. (I'm sorry though, marriage and adoption aren't rights) The problem, of course, when someone constantly complains, is that when there's an actual serious thing going on, one will not be taken seriously.
There's plenty of mistreatment of these people in society (and vice-versa as well), but being excluded from the military is hardly something to cry over....there are plenty of normal people excluded as well. Actually, normal people are excluded from the military all the time, why would this situation be any different?
Tolerance is a two-way street, one can't suddenly announce they have a certain thought or wish to do x activity, and be freaked out when people don't all say it's okay. (Give a hint, if it was okay, everyone would probably agree with it or wouldn't be taken aback by it)....There are some that would be okay with such a thing, but there are some that aren't going to be okay with it, but does one need the approval of everyone to do something? Someone, somewhere on the planet probably does not approve of every decision or announcement that someone or yourself have done. This is a world of multiple opinions, and just dismissing them and throwing around buzzwords without substance to the argument is embarrassing and pathetic. Reading motive into things when one doesn't know the person is embarrassing as well. And one more point of ranting....about these bathrooms....is not a public restroom a place to avoid if so possible? Why not shut one's trap, go do one's business and leave? Use one of the family single stalled restrooms and get on with it....Life need not be that complicated really.....Such is an attempt at the new orthodoxy.
Of course, these situations aren't quite as black and white as they seem, and there's more nuance to them, but should not those cases be treated individually, rather than the collective whole? Yes, it's very easy to paint a situation black and white when one is not in the situation, and i do believe that people that have to carry various crosses should be treated with mercy, compassion, and respect, but that said, it doesn't mean that everyone's special case be made normal. We deal with people as we should...individually.