Tweeting on Transgendered Troops Is not Enough

We’re almost into August, whether the recess is pushed back or not. An emerging skinny repeal of Obamacare by the Senate raises some troubling questions as outlined in an article in The Federalist by Chris Jacobs, who has a thorough understanding of both the policy side and the politics side of healthcare. White House Communications Director Anthony Scaramucci is in open combat with White House Chief of Staff Reince Priebus over an article in Politico that revealed Mooch’s finances, with Scaramucci accusing Priebus on CNN of being a leaker. The president is at war with his AG and insists on letting the world know about it through his usual tweeting and shaming strategy that may alienate him completely from his own party.

And North Korea may be much closer than was previously believed to having operational long-range missile capacity, capable of launching nuclear warheads not just at Alaska and Hawaii, but perhaps even capable of reaching the West Coast.

But never mind. We have no time for that. Let's instead waste time and oxygen and delve into the role of transgendered military personnel and whether and how they have a rightful place in combat operations. Or even in the military itself.

There's all sorts of sites you can go to to put together whatever facts and opinions you need to support your own view of this, or to lambaste the other side's point of view. I went to Red State, which tends to be #StillNeverTrump in it's general outlook, with Strieff as one notable exception. And Politico whose article on the background of Trump's Transgender Tweet is the basis for much of what was written at Red State.

As part of a spending bill, an amendment that would have prohibited DoD from spending Defense budget dollars on gender reassignment surgery was defeated by the Democrats and by 24 moderate GOP House members. Strieff, who is furious, lists all 24 of the GOP pro-gender-surgery Republicans who combined with Dems to defeat the amendment. So GOP House members who proposed the amendment (in other words the other 216 Republican House Members) went to Defense Secretary Mattis who hedged, and then they went around Mattis, directly to Trump.

Hence the Trump tweet prohibiting transgendered military members, which went much further than what the House GOP members specifically wanted: a ban on Pentagon-funded gender reassignment surgery. But it certainly got the job done, if by job you mean raising a media storm. And then there's the inevitable legal challenges that will be mounted. So it certainly re-ignited the battle on identity politics and the military, which is what the White House seemed to want all along.

There have been passionate tweets on either side by military men/women/ze's? and it raises a fundamental question about the military: is being a combat personnel of the American military a right for every and any applicant? Or a privilege accorded to those who can most effectively engage in the horrifyingly difficult work of surviving and killing the enemy in a combat zone? In other words to quote Senator McCain who criticized the tweets but said:

... any American who wants to serve our country and is able to meet the standards should have the opportunity to do so.

That's a two-part statement, and the second part about ability is not to be forgotten. And does gender dysphoria make you an unreliable combat soldier? And therefore unable to meet the standards?

These are questions that can't be answered by a series of tweets, whether by trans former Navy Seals, or by the president himself. Instead, it may very well have to be decided by the Supreme Court, a process which will involve expert witnesses and carefully constructed testimony, and amicus briefs and all the rest of it. The tweets, by that point, will be hanging out on the courtroom steps.

Posted by Keeley at July 27, 2017 9:20 PM
Comments
Comment #418707

There is no reason to believe that trannies cannot serve in the military, there just needs to be some clearly defined ground rules.

Government has no right or duty to use taxpayer money to pay for those electing to have plastic surgery.

If you are a male, you are subject to male standards, if you are female, you are subject to female standards. You do not get to choose the standards that apply to who you are pretending to be.

Being a soldier is all that matters. Your desire to wear a skirt or be called Kristin instead of Kris, means nothing.

Posted by: kctim at July 28, 2017 9:54 AM
Comment #418715

I believe that Trump is playing the media and the left. They bounce from one (supposed) constitutional crisis to another. In the meantime, Trump continues to dismantle the lefts and Obama’s legacy. I served four years in the military, from 1966 to 1970, and I can say for a certainty that I would have been very uncomfortable watching the guy bunking next to me put on a bra, panties, and a dress. I have no doubt there were queers and he/she’s in the military, but don’t ask don’t tell worked fine. Stats are that .03 of 1% of Americans are he/shes, but the left wants to make that number 50%. I don’t want to be around queers and he/shes, I don’t want them around my kids, or my grandkids…and that’s my 1st amendment rights to declare it. I stand with the doctors who call it a mental problem, but I go further to say it’s a sin problem. Who honestly believes a wacko leftist parent who says of her/his child, “little Johnny knew when he was only 4 years old that he was really a girl”. Give me a break.

Posted by: Blaine at July 28, 2017 2:08 PM
Comment #418720

President Trump is speaking to law enforcement in Brentwood, NY. Thousands are there, and cheering Trump and shouting “we love you”. In NY, the seat of liberalism. Can you believe it. The democrats had no use for Sessions, until the president came down on him; then the left couldn’t say enough good about. Now the AG and ICE are cracking down on illegals and MS-13. What is the left going to do now? Are they going to attack Sessions again, or continue to praise him.

Posted by: Blaine at July 28, 2017 2:34 PM
Comment #418721

1.6 billion already approved to start building the wall. But let’s talk about fake news…Russia. Thousands of MS-13 gang members arrested, gun confiscated, and drugs taken off the streets…but let’s talk about he/she’s in the military.

Posted by: Blaine at July 28, 2017 2:44 PM
Comment #418722

Thanks for your cogent comments Blaine.

“And does gender dysphoria make you an unreliable combat soldier? And therefore unable to meet the standards?”

My take on this is simple. I do not want anyone so confused about their gender to be given a rifle and ammo.

Posted by: Royal Flush at July 28, 2017 2:52 PM
Comment #418726

I spent 14 years in the USN 65-79, we had gays but they kept it to themselves. As far as transgender, they should NOT be allowed to be in the military. In a combat situation and combat zone they may not be able to get their meds for days. God only knows what emotional crisis they would go through during that time they are without the meds. The military must be combat ready at a moments notice and a person who needs medical attention on a regular basis does not fit that criteria.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at July 28, 2017 4:37 PM
Comment #418731

It is quite obvious that none of the people commenting above have ever known a transgender person. They are brave and capable people and I am honored that some of them choose to put their own lives at risk defending this country. There is no difference in ability between cisgender and transgender people.

Posted by: Warren Porter at July 28, 2017 6:43 PM
Comment #418732

There is no difference in ability between cisgender and transgender people.
Posted by: Warren Porter at July 28, 2017 6:43 PM

Really? Then why special names for people?

The mental process (cognition) of knowing who and what I am has a definitive affect on my ability to function.

“Feeling that your body does not reflect your true gender can cause severe distress, anxiety, and depression. “Dysphoria” is a feeling of dissatisfaction, anxiety, and restlessness. With gender dysphoria, the discomfort with your male or female body can be so intense that it can interfere with the way you function in normal life, for instance at school or work or during social activities.”

http://www.webmd.com/mental-health/gender-dysphoria#1

Posted by: Royal Flush at July 28, 2017 7:00 PM
Comment #418736

Warped, You never served in the Military did you? You have no idea what it is like in a War Zone do you? When you have to put your safety and the safety of the men around you in the hands of someone who has done without their Meds. for days and their emotional stability has gone haywire because of their hormone levels are out of wack is not a good idea. The Military has to be combat ready at all times, and not dependent on Medical needs. Transgender people may be brave but capable, NO!!!

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at July 28, 2017 7:20 PM
Comment #418737
Really? Then why special names for people?
Special names do not denote a difference in ability or function.
The mental process (cognition) of knowing who and what I am has a definitive affect on my ability to function.

I am acquainted with several transgender people. They know how or what they are with as much confidence as you or I do.

Gender dysphoria is a disorder suffered by only some transgender people. However, the condition can be cured with hormone replacement therapies and/or reassignment surgery. After treatment, people generally no longer operate any differently than the rest of us. There’s no reason to treat gender dysphoria any differently than any multitude of other conditions that might befall someone.

Posted by: Warren Porter at July 28, 2017 7:22 PM
Comment #418740
someone who has done without their Meds. for days and their emotional stability has gone haywire because of their hormone levels are out of wack is not a good idea

If a person cannot survive without their medication for a few days without going haywire, they are not fit to serve. However, there are plenty of transgender people who function fine without a daily medication regimen.

Posted by: Warren Porter at July 28, 2017 7:29 PM
Comment #418741

There’s no reason to treat gender dysphoria any differently than any multitude of other conditions that might befall someone.
Posted by: Warren Porter at July 28, 2017 7:22 PM

Hmmm…when I underwent a physical exam upon being drafted into the Army, I would not have passed if I had certain medical, mental or physical conditions. Has that changed Warren?

I furnished a source for my quote Warren. From where do you get all your contentions? Is it simply your personal belief based upon knowing a few trans?

Posted by: Royal Flush at July 28, 2017 7:34 PM
Comment #418742

“However, the condition can be cured…”

Really Warren? Please provide us some information.

If I am too obese to be accepted into the military I can also be cured. However, the military won’t fund my cure.

Posted by: Royal Flush at July 28, 2017 7:39 PM
Comment #418743

Warped, again you have never been in a war zone have you? The people fighting in a war zone DO NOT need to wonder if that transgender person who has been without his/her meds for days may snap. In a war zone there are enough things to worry about then some tranny who is going through withdrawals.

Posted by: Richard Kapitan at July 28, 2017 7:46 PM
Comment #418745
Hmmm…when I underwent a physical exam upon being drafted into the Army, I would not have passed if I had certain medical, mental or physical conditions. Has that changed Warren?

Certain conditions by necessity will impair a soldier sufficiently to disqualify them from service. Certain other conditions (eg mild myopia) are not onerous enough merit blanket prohibition, although there are certainly some jobs that may need to be excluded on a case by case basis.

Really Warren? Please provide us some information.

I am not a doctor, nor am I your research monkey. If you want to argue that gender dysphoria is incurable, you can provide that proof yourself. I am going on the anecdotal evidence from people that I know and some of them have told me that they do not experience dysphoria anymore after receiving their treatments.

If I am too obese to be accepted into the military I can also be cured. However, the military won’t fund my cure.

Yet, the military gladly hands out free eyeglasses to mildly nearsighted recruits all the time.

The people fighting in a war zone DO NOT need to wonder if that transgender person who has been without his/her meds for days may snap

Soldiers in war zones can rest easy. Their transgender comrades will not snap any more often than their cisgender comrades. If a particular transgender individual cannot handle the pressures of combat, that’s a different matter, but that was the policy already. If a transgender person is accepted into the military, it can be assumed they have been evaluated by trained medical personnel and certified as fit to serve.

Posted by: Warren Porter at July 28, 2017 8:26 PM
Comment #418746

Warped, if a transgender person is accepted into the military I’m sure that it is before their transformation. I doubt that they would be accepted into the military after their transformation.

Posted by: Richard Kapitan at July 28, 2017 8:31 PM
Comment #418755

Also Warped, the Military is NOT an equal opportunity employer. You can be denied for a number of reasons.

Posted by: Richard Kapitan at July 28, 2017 10:43 PM
Comment #418769

Warren has no idea what he is talking about. He has no military experience but that doesn’t stop him from trying to act like an expert.

Posted by: Blaine at July 29, 2017 8:25 AM
Comment #418770

Warren makes the blanket claim that transgender soldiers would not snap any more often than anyone else; but it’s a fact that transgenders are 20% more likely to commit suicide. Warren probably does not understand this, but the military has one standard that everyone must meet. Example, I went through boot camp with a young man, who they found out was allergic to wool, which meant he couldn’t wear wool uniforms. He begged to stay in the service and said he could serve in an area where he didn’t have to wear wool. He was given a medical discharge because he had to meet the requirements of serving wherever and whenever they sent him.

Posted by: Blaine at July 29, 2017 8:42 AM
Comment #418771

If an individual cannot meet the military’s strict standards of physical and mental resilience, then they don’t belong in the military. Nothing about transgender people indicates that they cannot meet the same standards as cisgender people.

Posted by: Warren Porter at July 29, 2017 9:01 AM
Comment #418778

That’s true Warped as long as they keep quiet about their feelings and have their transformation done after they serve, that is what that Navy Seal did. His/her transformation was done after.

Posted by: Richard Kapitan at July 29, 2017 11:27 AM
Comment #418781

The military may hand out eyeglasses but they don’t enlist blind people. Correcting minor sight problems is a far cry from changing someone from a male to a female. That is abnormal and unnecessary. What they did for Manning was pure politics and has no place in the military. It’s not a social playground, it’s a killing machine.

Posted by: Weary Willie at July 29, 2017 12:33 PM
Comment #418782
as long as they …

KAP, you have no expertise or authority to back up your pronouncement. The military reviewed these issues extensively under the Obama administration. People who openly acknowledge their transgender status are no different than anyone else in their capabilities. Undergoing hormone replacement therapy or reassignment surgery does not in of itself make one unfit to serve. The same can also be said for openly acknowledging one’s transgender status while electing to not modify one’s bodily anatomy or chemistry.

In fact, I am willing to say that keeping quiet about one’s transgenderism and sequestering those thoughts is a recipe for disaster. Just look at what happened to Chelsea Manning. If she had been given the opportunity to acknowledge the truth about herself, then she would never have leaked those secrets.

That is abnormal and unnecessary.

Please save your petty moralizing for another time, WW.

Posted by: Warren Porter at July 29, 2017 1:02 PM
Comment #418783

Warped, I have more expertise then you have regarding the military. Manning is a clear example of why transgender should not be allowed in the military. You just blew your reasoning all to HELL bring up that traitor. Goes to show the mental issues associated with transgenders. The military should never be used for social experiments like the one Obama did with transgenders. If a man thinks he is a woman he had mental issues and just like any other person with mental issues should be denoed

Posted by: Richard Kapitan at July 29, 2017 1:39 PM
Comment #418784

Also Warped, why don’t you join the military and find out what it is like before you spout off things you know nothing about. You are not the expert you think you are. I served I know what it is like in the military.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at July 29, 2017 1:46 PM
Comment #418785

“I am not a doctor, nor am I your research monkey.”

Fine Warren. Then my linked medical research dominates over your anecdotal beliefs.

Posted by: Royal Flush at July 29, 2017 1:49 PM
Comment #418787

Why am I not allowed to post a response?

Posted by: Blaine at July 29, 2017 2:10 PM
Comment #418789

My question goes through, but nothing else.

Posted by: Blaine at July 29, 2017 2:13 PM
Comment #418790

Warperd I am not a expert on transgenders but I do know the military is not the place for a he/she or she/he to be in. As you said you are not a “RESEARCH MONKEY” but Obama made transgenders into just that by letting them in the military.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at July 29, 2017 2:15 PM
Comment #418792

Warren, you have already stated that you weren’t a doctor, and I assume you’re not a psychiatrist and yet you make the blanket statement that there is no reason why transgenders can’t meet the same standards as anyone else. We are not talking civilians, we are talking highly trained military that must work as a single unit. The transgender by nature is confused and suffering from a mental disorders.

Like everything else the left loves to champion based on feelings and emotion; they never look at the facts. If, as has been shown in Royal’s and my links, that transgender is a “Mental Disorder”, how could a person possibly be trusted to have his/her finger on the trigger/button?

Dr. Paul R. McHugh of John Hopkins on cnsnews, help me Royal. Someone on WB is blocking me.

Posted by: Blaine at July 29, 2017 2:22 PM
Comment #418797

Blaine, I found the article by Dr. McHugh and tried to post a link but I too am blocked.

Posted by: Royal Flush at July 29, 2017 2:31 PM
Comment #418798

WB will not let me post the link.

John Hopkins psychiatrist calls transgenderism a mental disorder. Does someone with a mental disorder need to be in the military?

Posted by: Blaine at July 29, 2017 2:32 PM
Comment #418799

Blaine, the linked article has the word “s*x” in the link so it is blocked.

Here’s an alternative.

http://www.cnsnews.com/blog/michael-w-chapman/johns-hopkins-psychiatrist-transgendered-men-dont-become-women-they-become

Posted by: Royal Flush at July 29, 2017 2:35 PM
Comment #418800

Interesting that a legitimate psychiatric expert on the subject is blocked on WB. But Warren’s touchy feely comments have no trouble being posted. My guess is that there is nothing that can be said to sway WP’s thinking. His mentality is we are wrong, no Matt that most of us have been in the military and know how it works.

Posted by: Blaine at July 29, 2017 2:38 PM
Comment #418801

Thanks Royal, I never noticed, but wouldn’t even let me post the title of the article without the web link.

Posted by: Blaine at July 29, 2017 2:42 PM
Comment #418802

I’m working from a iPhone and it’s not like using a laptop.

Posted by: Blaine at July 29, 2017 2:46 PM
Comment #418805
Please save your petty moralizing for another time, WW.

You certainly get testy when you lose an argument, don’t you?


Posted by: Weary Willie at July 29, 2017 3:46 PM
Comment #418810

Glad you noticed that about Warren too, Weary.

Posted by: Royal Flush at July 29, 2017 4:12 PM
Comment #418815

Saying a guy commits treason because he isn’t a girl is absolutely hilarious! That made my eyebrows chuckle!

Posted by: Weary Willie at July 29, 2017 5:19 PM
Comment #418816

I’m having a real problem with some of WP’s comments. He states that the military has strict standards for physical and mental resilience when entering the military, and yet they should be able, at tax payers expense, to force the military to pay for sex changes. But according to Dr. McHugh this is when the mental problems begin. It’s a fact that transgenders have a 20% greater chance of committing suicide than normal people. So the mental resilience of the recruit means nothing unless the military doctors are allowed to question candidates about their sexual beliefs before entering. Then, based upon WP’s own logic, the candidate should not be allowed to enter the military. So, based upon WP’s beliefs, Trump has done the exact right thing. Am I understanding Warren Porter correctly?

Posted by: Blaine at July 29, 2017 5:46 PM
Comment #418817
In the case of Australia, there is no evidence and there have been no reports of any effect on cohesion, operational effectiveness, or readiness (Frank, 2010). In the case of Israel, there has also been no reported effect on cohesion or readiness (Speckhard and Paz, 2014). Transgender personnel in these militaries have reported feeling supported and accommodated throughout their gender transition, and there is no evidence of any impact on operational effectiveness (Speckhard and Paz, 2014). In fact, commanders have reported that transgender personnel perform their military duties and contribute effectively to their units (Speckhard and Paz, 2014). Interviews with commanders in the United Kingdom also found no effect on operational effectiveness or readiness (Frank, 2010). Some commanders reported that increases in diversity had led to increases in readiness and performance. Interviews with these same commanders also found no effect on cohesion, though there were some reports of resistance to the policy change within the general military population, which led to a less-than-welcoming environment for transgender personnel. However, this resistance was apparently short-lived (Frank, 2010)/blockquote> Checkmate
Posted by: Warren Porter at July 29, 2017 5:55 PM
Comment #418818

Thanks for the research Warren. From the little I could glean from your link, none of the studies were performed under combat conditions, or heavy stress situations.

None of the results stated were shown to be based on anything but opinion. Three of the authors and specialty named in your link are:

Agnes Gereben Schaefer Senior Political Scientist
Radha Iyengar Senior Economist
Jennifer Kavanagh Political Scientist

I will believe the link I provided from WebMD. Why should any military lives be at risk for a social experiment?

“With gender dysphoria, the discomfort with your male or female body can be so intense that it can interfere with the way you function in normal life, for instance at school or work or during social activities.”

Posted by: Royal Flush at July 29, 2017 6:31 PM
Comment #418819

Short-lived. Fine. The only problem is that the left is never satisfied. You give them an inch they want another inch, again and again. They’re like stray dogs. You feed them and they keep coming back. For all we know the left will be having our military doing cadence in tutus in the future. We have to draw a line somewhere. It might be best to draw it on the healthy side of mental stability.

Posted by: Weary Willie at July 29, 2017 6:33 PM
Comment #418820

The three social scientists are merely citing preexisting research: (Frank 2010) and (Speckhard and Paz, 2014). If you want to quibble credentials, take it up with them.

Posted by: Warren Porter at July 29, 2017 6:37 PM
Comment #418821

Warped, How a person reacts in a combat situation is what counts. We saw how Manning reacted in a non combat situation the he/she became a traitor. Combat is bad enough for a normal person and you think we should put our trust in a person who doesn’t know what gender he/she wants to be? What another country wants to do with their military is their business and their citizens business.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at July 29, 2017 6:43 PM
Comment #418823

I still can’t post anything, someone has shut me down.

Posted by: Blaine at July 29, 2017 6:52 PM
Comment #418825

You will never get WP to surrender his socialist views.

Posted by: Blaine at July 29, 2017 6:54 PM
Comment #418827

He spent who knows how many years having this stuff spoon fed into his brain. He knows nothing, has never done anything…but by God don’t dare try to tell him anything.

Posted by: Blaine at July 29, 2017 6:57 PM
Comment #418828

“If you want to quibble credentials, take it up with them.”

Posted by: Warren Porter at July 29, 2017 6:37 PM

How rich is that comment friends. How often have we read Warren dissing any man-made global warming opinion from qualified scientists simply because they don’t agree with what he was taught by some Liberal Professor with an agenda?

I place no faith at all in the Rand link he provided and he won’t even defend the authors listed in that very link.

“In fact, gender dysphoria—the official psychiatric term for feeling oneself to be of the opposite s*x—belongs in the family of similarly disordered assumptions about the body, such as anorexia nervosa and body dysmorphic disorder,” said McHugh.

“Its treatment should not be directed at the body as with surgery and hormones any more than one treats obesity-fearing anorexic patients with liposuction,” he said.

In fact, at Johns Hopkins, where they pioneered s*x-change-surgery, “we demonstrated that the practice brought no important benefits,” said Dr. McHugh. “As a result, we stopped offering that form of treatment in the 1970s.”

http://www.cnsnews.com/blog/michael-w-chapman/johns-hopkins-psychiatrist-transgendered-men-dont-become-women-they-become

Posted by: Royal Flush at July 29, 2017 6:58 PM
Comment #418829
However, there is plenty of evidence showing that “transgendering” is a “psychological rather than a biological matter,” said Dr. McHugh.

“In fact, gender dysphoria—the official psychiatric term for feeling oneself to be of the opposite sex—belongs in the family of similarly disordered assumptions about the body, such as anorexia nervosa and body dysmorphic disorder,” said McHugh.

“Its treatment should not be directed at the body as with surgery and hormones any more than one treats obesity-fearing anorexic patients with liposuction,” he said.

So let’s get this straight; Warren Porter gives us “proof” of happy campers in the military by providing the quotes of political military leaders who’s futures are decided by politicians who are in favor of turning the military into candy stripers? Have I got this straight? Forgive me if I don’t put any faith in WP’s links.

Posted by: Blaine at July 29, 2017 6:59 PM
Comment #418830

However, there is plenty of evidence showing that “transgendering” is a “psychological rather than a biological matter,” said Dr. McHugh.

Posted by: Blaine at July 29, 2017 7:00 PM
Comment #418831

Thank you Royal…WB would not let me load that quote.

Posted by: Blaine at July 29, 2017 7:02 PM
Comment #418832
How a person reacts in a combat situation is what counts. We saw how Manning reacted in a non combat situation the he/she became a traitor.

Chelsea served before the military was integrated. Her experience is a warning AGAINST placing restrictions on transgender soldiers.

doesn’t know what gender he/she wants to be

You don’t seem to understand. Transgender people know exactly what gender they are, YOU are the one who is confused.

What another country wants to do with their military is their business and their citizens business.

Israel has experience putting transgender troops in combat situations for many years. It would behoove us to listen to what they have to say and take that under consideration.

I am still waiting for anyone to cite any concrete and comprehensive study of transgender soldiers that finds such individuals unfit for service. Instead, I have a lot of prejudiced assumptions, derogatory slurs and a miscited WebMD article. In other words, nothing but bullshit supports the opposition. People seem like they are more interested in hurting marginalized individuals than giving the military the best tools and personnel they need to win the next war.

Posted by: Warren Porter at July 29, 2017 7:07 PM
Comment #418834

Great Warren, let’s just throw Dr. McHugh’s 40 years of experience in transgender work out the window. Multiple books written on the subject and research. But he don’t fit you pre-conceived perceptions, so let’s just toss his research out, in favor of what politicians say.

Posted by: Blaine at July 29, 2017 7:34 PM
Comment #418835

Warped, Israel has 1/10 the size of our military. Israel has 168,000 active forces our military 1,373,000 active forces. How many of Israel’s military is stationed outside of Israel? How many of our military are outside of the U. S.? How many Transgender are serving in Israel? How many in the U. S.? I read a few different accounts of the number one account says 630-6500 another says 15,000 serving in the U. S. which is it? As far as Manning quit with the cop out of restrictions placed on him/her. The same thing was placed on that Navy Seal yet he wasn’t a traitor and he didn’t change until after he retired. He would of been kicked out if he/she spoke up.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at July 29, 2017 7:41 PM
Comment #418836

Warped just read a L A Times article dated 26 July that said Israel in 2014 had at least 5 transgender in their military.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at July 29, 2017 7:47 PM
Comment #418837

Also Warped, Considering where Israel is located and the size of their forces I wouldn’t be to choosey of who was in my military either as long as they could pick up a gun would be fine.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at July 29, 2017 8:23 PM
Comment #418840

I know how the left loves polls and stats, but the stats are that .03% of the American population is transgender. At that percentage a total of 411.9 transgenders would be in the military. But you have to take in to account that a majority of men who want to be women, would never enlist in the military. My guess is there is no more than a handful of transgenders in the military. But as usual, the left loves to change the lives of the many, for the few. Such as Obamacare; they destroyed the HC of the nation, in order to give handouts to a few.

Posted by: Blaine at July 29, 2017 10:57 PM
Comment #418841

Do you reckon the left is starting to figure out the truth about the real Russian connection? It’s strangely silent; but the plot is starting to thicken:

Fusion GPS, the political opposition research group at the center of the media’s Trump-colluded-with-the-Russians “narrative” has been abnormally cozy with the mainstream media organs it’s used in its disinformation and smear operations. Now, they’re protecting them.

Daily Caller reports that these very same press creatures who worked with Fusion GPS to spread the false stories about Trump, have gotten curiously silent about the firm’s role in the widening web of scandal about the firm’s actual role in colluding with the Russians. They include CNN, the Washington Post and the New York Times, none of which have reported a word about the new revelations showing that Fusion GPS took money from the Russians to undercut President Trump.

Fusion GPS apparently took money from anyone. They not only cooked up the infamous phony “golden showers” dossier about President Trump, not a word of which was true, though some media outlets reported it that way, they also engineered the Russian meetings with President Trump’s son, Donald Trump, Jr., and two other associates inside the Trump Tower, as a means of making it appear that Trump was in bed with the Russians all along. In testimony last Thursday before the Senate Judiciary Committee, hedge fund manager William Browder said they were up to their eyeballs working with the most nefarious elements of the Russian government/oligarchy. Daily Caller writes:


“At the same time that Fusion GPS was crafting the dossier allegedly exposing the Trump campaign’s collusion with the Russian government, they were also working to advance Russian interests, according to Browder’s testimony.”

Browder told the committee that Natalia Veselnitskaya, the same Russian lawyer who met with Donald Trump Jr., Jared Kushner and Paul Manafort at Trump Tower during the campaign, “hired Glenn Simpson of the firm Fusion GPS to conduct a smear campaign against me and Sergei Magnitsky in advance of congressional hearings on the Global Magnitsky Act.” The law is named for Sergei Magnitsky, a lawyer who represented Browder before Russian authorities jailed and killed him after he exposed a massive fraud scheme.


http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2017/07/fusion_gps__in_bed_with_the_mainstream_media_all_along.html#ixzz4oKzKhrhR

It was just a few weeks ago that several leftist on WB were absolutely convinced, or at east trying to convince, that everything pertaining to the “golden showers” was gospel truth and would lead to the demise of the Trump empire. Oh, it’s not over yet…the truth always prevailes.

Posted by: Blaine at July 30, 2017 1:49 PM
Comment #418862

I guess when WP loses the argument, instead of admitting he was wrong and was persuaded by the evidence, he just goes to his room and sulks. Don’t you just love the lofty comments of how WP loves the debate and wants to learn from opposing arguments. So much for lofty comments. Take your marbles and go home little boy.

Posted by: Blaine at July 30, 2017 11:04 PM
Comment #418871

Blaine you seem confused, first of all I never “leftist on WB were absolutely convinced, or at east trying to convince, that everything pertaining to the “golden showers” was gospel truth and would lead to the demise of the Trump empire.” as you claim, go back and read what was said.


Secondly ,

“”What is clear is that the president and his allies are desperately trying to smear Fusion GPS because it investigated Donald Trump’s ties to Russia,” Fusion said in the statement.

“They have pulled out all the stops, including this false allegation about FARA. At today’s hearing, not even Mr. Browder could understand or adopt the Republicans’ nonsensical argument that Russia had an agent investigate and expose Russia’s influence on the election. Fusion GPS is cooperating with Congress and looks forward to sharing the truth.”“

http://www.businessinsider.com/fusion-gps-trump-russia-statement-2017-7

Posted by: j2t2 at July 31, 2017 11:55 AM
Comment #418872

Sorry j2, but businessinsider.com merely states the allegations of both sides. You need to follow the link to Americanthinker and read it instead of scanning. The whole story published by buzzfeed was false. The original dossier called “golden showers” was fake and every news outlet knew it was fake, but when buzzfeed published the story, every other fake news outlet published the story as per buzzfeed. Since an internet news outlet, buzzfeed, ran the story, then it must be factual. Your side don’t have a leg to stand on on this one. The story is fake news and as the story develops, the MSM and your democrat leaders are going to try to distance themselves from the story. That is, everyone except a bunch of fruitcake lefties on the blog sites. You guys build your arguments around conspiracy theories and not facts.

Posted by: Blaine at July 31, 2017 2:04 PM
Comment #418876

I don’t know Blaine the article you refer to in the American Thinker link just spins the Daily Caller, a bit, with the writers biased opinion. It is one sided as you say but I don’t consider that a plus. The business insider tells us more of the story, from both sides of the aisle.

With Trump very outspoken in the recent past about curtailing our 1st amendment rights on basic issues like reporting the number of people at his inauguration it is hard to believe anything coming from his people. Especially as desperation sets in with more and more information becoming public about the Russian influence in the past election.

It seems to me the problem is us average Americans cannot really tell what is fact and what is fiction with all these internet sites. We know the Russians had it out for Clinton and more to gain with Trump in office. So to think it was the other way around based on the Daily Caller spouting repub talking points is a stretch for most of us.

You guys on the right thought it was all good that the Russian interference in the election process went your way. But the fallout from that is the disinformation campaign conducted by conservative propagandist for years on the Clinton’s and more recently the Russian meddling with fake news sites and deliberate misinformation have damaged the country. Coupled with the corporate media , which IMHO includes Fox and most other conservatives media as well as the more mainstream media, has left us wondering what is the truth.

So for conservatives to once again suggest Trump and his campaign is clean while placing blame on the dems is..well… is… nothing more than what you have been doing all along. Insisting Trump and his campaign is the victim of the MSM, on one hand while telling us how great hos tweets are as they manipulate the media on the other hand.

The American Thinker story is just more water under the same bridge the only different being Congress just voted for tougher sanctions on Russia and then this story comes out blaming this Fusion GPS group. Fingers pointing everywhere by everyone. To bad Trump started out with so many lies, We just can’t believe what he tells us.

Another point worthy of consideration is the golden shower reporting all stated it was just allegations, very truthful IMHO. The Buzzfeed story wasn’t false although if we had a decent free press in this country it would have not been published based solely on allegation. But with corporate media it is a sensational story and it attracts readers and sells product. IMHO it sounds entirely plausible based on Trumps character.

Posted by: j2t2 at July 31, 2017 3:18 PM
Comment #418879
It seems to me the problem is us average Americans cannot really tell what is fact and what is fiction with all these internet sites.

j2, I hate to be the one to tell you this, but you are certainly not to be considered as “us average Americans”. Now if you said “us average nutcases from the far left”, I would be willing to accept your strategy for fake comments.

We know the Russians had it out for Clinton and more to gain with Trump in office.

Yeah, sure, especially after she gave them 20% of US uranium reserves. Or perhaps after they gave her husband hundreds of thousands for fake speeches, or it might be because her administration would have been an extension of Obama’s; remember the administration that said on a hot mike “Tell Vlad I’ll be more flexible after the election”. No, j2, your spreading BS again…

You guys on the right thought it was all good that the Russian interference in the election process went your way.

Evidence??? or more liberal talking points?

It is a waste of time talking to you or ph, you two just spread the latest liberal talking points as if they were factual… Your wasting our time.

Posted by: Blaine at July 31, 2017 5:02 PM
Comment #418880

Oh, by the way, you speak about not being able to tell the difference between fact or fiction; then you place a disclaimer on any material found on a conservative site, but boast that anything on a blatantly leftist site is pure fact. Typical leftist mumbo-jumbo…

Posted by: Blaine at July 31, 2017 5:17 PM
Comment #418882
instead of admitting he was wrong and was persuaded by the evidence

I posted a link to a study commissioned by the military and conducted by the RAND corporation that backs up my claims. As of today, no one has refuted that study with an academic study of their own. KAP reached for some straws trying to draw distinctions between the IDF and US military. What KAP fails to address is that the RAND study looked at not only the IDF, but also the militaries of the UK, Australia and others. Throughout all the research and studies, there is precisely zero evidence that transgender recruits are any less capable (as a group) than cisgender recruits.

And no, a bigoted octogenarian who happens to have once been an esteemed practicing psychiatrist many decades ago does not refute a comprehensive study like the RAND one I cited. Particularly when his John Hopkins University colleagues condemn his work.

he just goes to his room and sulks.

More like I go my job and work my ass off in order to pay your bills. Sorry, I can’t spend all day leeching off of Uncle Sam like you do.

Posted by: Warren Porter at July 31, 2017 5:46 PM
Comment #418883

Warped, I have heard conflicting reports on how many Transgender are actually part of our military. It goes from a handful to 15,000. How can a study be done when they can’t even agree on the numbers. I have stated before, that if a transgender wants to serve he/she do it prior to his/her change, NOT AFTER. As far as other countries go, I could care less what they want to do with their military, if they want to admit the blind, crippled or crazy that is their choice. One thing about our military is that it is the best and if we disallow certain people because of various medical or civil reason it explains why we are the best. The military IS NOT an equal opportunity employer, you have no right to be in the military, it is also NOT a place for social experiments.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at July 31, 2017 6:19 PM
Comment #418884

Also Warped, I’ll take the word of a shrink over the people at Rand any day.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at July 31, 2017 6:21 PM
Comment #418885

Many informed people have expressed their opinion on trans in the military. Warren has finally found a way to discredit an honorable man and even resorts to calling him “bigoted” and a “octogenarian”. I will ignore Warren and his nasty comments.

President Trump has made a decision. The military is obligated to obey; just as they followed the order by Obama to admit trans.

The issue will be resolved by our judicial system and that can take a long, long time.


Posted by: Royal Flush at July 31, 2017 6:46 PM
Comment #418886
It goes from a handful to 15,000
If you read the RAND study you would know:
It is difficult to estimate the number of transgender personnel in the military due to current policies and a lack of empirical data. Applying a range of prevalence estimates, combining data from multiple surveys, and adjusting for the male/female distribution in the military provided a midrange estimate of around 2,450 transgender personnel in the active component (out of a total number of approximately 1.3 million active-component service members) and 1,510 in the Selected Reserve.
I have stated before, that if a transgender wants to serve he/she do it prior to his/her change, NOT AFTER

Firstly, not all transgender people choose to physically alter their bodies. I don’t know how that falls before or after what you are calling “his/her change”. Secondly, there is still no reason why a person who physically alters his or her body through hormones or surgery cannot serve in the military. If they are mentally unstable if they miss their hormones for a few days, then it makes sense to exclude them. But if they are mentally resilient to survive fine without those drugs, then I see no reason to bar them from using them when they are available. It’s no different from letting a soldier with erectile dysfunction from taking viagra.

I’ll take the word of a shrink over the people at Rand any day.

The RAND study isn’t simply the opinion of RAND, it is a comprehensive summary of peer reviewed research from a wide variety of sources including mental health experts, psychologists and psychiatrists. So, by rejecting the RAND study, you are dismissing the expertise of shrinks across the nation.

Dr. McHugh has his contrarian opinion. I am not an expert in terms of psychiatry, but my experience is that when the whole scientific community says A and there’s a really old guy that says B, the old guy is probably holding on too hard to obsolete beliefs. It reminds of Max Plank’s quote, “A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.” It seems reasonable that the idea that transgenderism is a mental disorder ought to be buried alongside Dr. McHugh.

Many informed people have expressed their opinion on trans in the military. Warren has finally found a way to discredit an honorable man and even resorts to calling him “bigoted” and a “octogenarian”. I will ignore Warren and his nasty comments.
I’m sorry that you are too think-skinned to avoid being offended by playful joking banter. It must be sad to be a conservative and not understand humor. Posted by: Warren Porter at July 31, 2017 7:36 PM
Comment #418888

Always follow the money to understand the medical community.

A “mental disorder” such as gender identity confusion, is now only a mental illness if you think it is. So now, one can “think” themselves into; or out of; a mental disorder. Isn’t that swell?

BOSTON — The term “gender identity disorder” has been eliminated from the new edition of the American Psychiatric Association’s official guide to classifying mental illnesses, known as the DSM-5.

Whereas previously a man who “self-identified” as a woman (or vice versa) could have been classified as mentally ill, now the DSM-5 uses the term “gender dysphoria,” which means it is only a mental illness if you’re troubled by this self-identification. Elated activists in the “LGBT” community had lobbied the APA for the change for years.

Posted by: Royal Flush at July 31, 2017 7:53 PM
Comment #418889

Royal Flush,

Historically, prejudice and bigotry have led to egregious errors within the medical community, such as when the APA decided to classify homosexuality as a mental illness. Fortunately, in recent times, clearer heads have prevailed and past mistakes have been rectified.

Posted by: Warren Porter at July 31, 2017 7:59 PM
Comment #418892

The goal of the left was harolded by Obama, to fundamentally change America. These leftists hate America; they think we are an evil colonialist nation that has stolen the earth’s resources. America is the greatest country that has ever existed, yet the left is embarrassed that we have such a successful life style. We should be like the rest of the world. Everything the left does is done for the ultimate goal of putting arrogant Americans in their place.

Open borders: to flood our nation with unskilled 3rd worlders who come here for free stuff.

Global warming: to take our wealth in the name of global warming and redistribute it to the rest of the world.

National HC: to put US citizens on the same level as the rest of the diseased world.

Shut down fossil fuel: to drive America back to lifestyles of the 19th century.

And the list goes on. The democrat party has lost so many elections, they are now running on conservative platforms, but they are liars. The lefts agenda is the destruction of all that we hold dear. These socialists were here in the beginning of the nation; they were the ones who wanted to serve the king. They were here during the civil war; they were the ones who supported slavery. They were here during the Vietnam war; they were the ones who protested and ran to Canada. They are here now; they are the ones that want to flood America with Muslim terrorists and secede their rights to Shariah law. They are the ones who want to disarm Americans by doing away with the 2nd amendment. They are the ones who followed Margaret Sanger’a desire to rid the nation of blacks through abortion.

By the way Warren Porter, you are paying NOTHING toward my retirement. I invested in my own retirement and I draw no SS, so thank you very much. But I will guarantee you will never draw a single penny of what you’re paying it; and you can thank the left for raiding the trust fund and spending your dollars on welfare programs in order to buy votes

Posted by: Blaine at July 31, 2017 8:04 PM
Comment #418893

It must be sad to be a conservative and not understand humor. Posted by: Warren Porter at July 31, 2017 7:36 PM

Ah, yes, humor like “cave dweller” and “college clown”?

WP would have us believe…”the whole scientific community says A (disagrees with Dr. McHugh). How outrageous is this? Has he polled everyone in the scientific community?

WP holds the same closed mind view about MMGW. If one doesn’t subscribe to his belief, then one is cast aside just as McHugh was.

I sincerely hope that WP is not serving in any work capacity that requires a responsibility to be accurate and ethical in reporting.

Posted by: Royal Flush at July 31, 2017 8:06 PM
Comment #418894

Warped, This study is like the Climate studies, one side will give their opinion to doom and gloom and the other side dismisses that study for theirs of common earth cycle. You have picked the one that coinsides with your take on the subject of Transgenders while I reject your findings. Lets face it Warped we both can find studies which will support each others take on the subject. You might feel comfortable with a transgender person while in a foxhole in a combat zone where I don’t. Other countries may have good findings with them but how many of them deploy as much as we do? How many are in their military seeing how they have a smaller force then we do?

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at July 31, 2017 8:08 PM
Comment #418895
Ah, yes, humor like “cave dweller” and “college clown”?

I didn’t know you were Dr. McHugh. If so, I would respectively apologize.

WP holds the same closed mind view about MMGW. If one doesn’t subscribe to his belief, then one is cast aside just as McHugh was.

It’s not a matter of close view vs. open view. If one seeks the advice of experts and one sees one expert all by his lonesome self advocating “A” while all his colleagues are publishing “B” and building a large corpus of research surrounding “B” then the best assumption to make is that “B” is the truth.

Now, there are rare cases when “A” gets vindicated later on, but that does not happen very often. I do not accept such contrarians’ ideas unless they have some very compelling evidence to back up their claims.

It’s quite clear that you and other conservatives evaluate things by a very different standard. Instead of seeking the truth, your approach seeks confirmation of your pre-existing beliefs. That is antithetical to the scientific method, and it explains why I hold a job which requires that I am trusted to be accurate and ethical in my reporting and you do not.

Posted by: Warren Porter at July 31, 2017 8:22 PM
Comment #418897

Warped, Quit with the BULLS**T, the same could be said of your evaluation standards. Lets just say we agree to disagree. Studies depend on who does it and which side is footing the bill.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at July 31, 2017 8:31 PM
Comment #418898
Quit with the BULLS**T, the same could be said of your evaluation standards. Lets just say we agree to disagree. Studies depend on who does it and which side is footing the bill.

You don’t seem to understand what I wrote. I do not cherry pick to find something that conforms to my preexisting ideas. I just look at what the consensus is and usually go with that. Only in the rare case of specific evidence that I can personally comprehend do I ever prefer the ideas of the contrarian.

And even though Royal Flush may scold me once again, I do consider it a relevant fact that Dr. McHugh is over 85 years old. He presumably attended medical school in the late ’50s and early ’60s when bigoted ideas held much more sway than they do today. His writing today reminds me of the stuff Margaret Sanger would write back in the day.

Posted by: Warren Porter at July 31, 2017 8:43 PM
Comment #418899

Warped, I understand what you wrote. But like I said I reject Rand’s findings. Just like you reject that 85 year old Dr. McHugh who probably has more experience then any 10 of those Rand people. In stead of some shrink or some thing called Rand. I’d prefer to have GI Joe do his own assessment of Transgenders in combat of those before starting treatments and those who have started treatment on their readiness for the military life. IMO that is where truthful results would be found. This is not a scientific finding but some of the posts on facebook concerning the subject, I would venture to say that it is about 100 against to every 1 who is for.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at July 31, 2017 9:09 PM
Comment #418901
But like I said I reject Rand’s findings. Just like you reject that 85 year old Dr. McHugh who probably has more experience then any 10 of those Rand people. In stead of some shrink or some thing called Rand.

Firstly, it’s not just Rand that you are rejecting. RAND is just surveying the large body of research. Their report contains dozens of citations to other articles. So, by rejecting RAND you are rejecting the expertise of perhaps a hundred people.

Just like you reject that 85 year old Dr. McHugh who probably has more experience then any 10 of those Rand people
No, it’s not just like my rejection of Dr. McHugh. I don’t reject Dr. McHugh because of the prejudices of my political ideology. I reject him because his colleagues have rejected him. The situation is not symmetric. And no, surviving to old age doesn’t give ideas extra validity on the basis of “experience”. That might work in other fields, but not in Science where old age is more likely to result in obsolescence, not wisdom.
I’d prefer to have GI Joe do his own assessment of Transgenders in combat of those before starting treatments and those who have started treatment on their readiness for the military life. IMO that is where truthful results would be found.

In case I didn’t make it clear, the RAND study was commissioned by the DoD and all the top brass signed off on it when it was completed. Specifically:

U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) policies have rendered both the physical and psychological aspects of transgender conditions as disqualifying conditions for accession and allow for the administrative discharge of service members who fall into these categories. However, in July 2015, Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter announced that DoD would create a working group to study the policy and readiness implications of welcoming transgender persons to serve openly. In addition, he directed that decision authority in all administrative discharges for those diagnosed with gender dysphoria1 or who identify themselves as transgender be elevated to the Under Secretary of Defense (Personnel and Readiness), who will make determinations on all potential separations (DoD, 2015b).It is against this backdrop that DoD is considering allowing transgender personnel to serve openly. To assist in identifying the potential implications of such a change in policy, the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness asked the RAND National Defense Research Institute to conduct a study to (1) identify the health care needs of the transgender population, transgender service members potential health care utilization rates, and the costs associated with extending health care coverage for transition-related treatments; (2) assess the potential readiness implications of allowing transgender service members to serve openly; and (3) review the experiences of foreign militaries that permit transgender service members to serve openly. This report documents the findings from that study. This research should be of interest to DoD and military service leadership, members of Congress, and others who are interested in the potential implications of allowing transgender personnel to serve openly in the U.S. armed forces.

And if you want another opinion, here is the work of Lieutenant Endia T. Mendez at the Naval Postgraduate School:

The study concludes that medical reasons for excluding transgenders from the U.S. military are inconsistent with prevailing views.

I would venture to say that it is about 100 against to every 1 who is for.

And my Facebook feed is the exact opposite, which is precisely why I never make an argumentum ad populum citing Facebook. The algorithms there are engineered to encourage confirmation bias. This explains why I do not use Facebook very much anymore. There is nothing to be learned there.

Posted by: Warren Porter at July 31, 2017 9:47 PM
Comment #418903

Warped, Did they do any studies in a combat environment such as Afghanistan? Or did they do their studies here stateside under perfect conditions. All because the DoD signed off on something doesn’t mean it was done in less then perfect conditions. That’s why I stated GI Joe do it out in the field in combat. The only one I know of was a Navy Seal who did his thing after retirement. Mendez did a study of Canada and Australia and said further study is needed. Any of these studies you so proudly post have been done in combat situations?

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at July 31, 2017 10:08 PM
Comment #418904

Also Warped it is easy to say that a Tranny can serve here stateside because of the perfect conditions. I want a combat assessment before I’ll give in to them.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at July 31, 2017 10:11 PM
Comment #418906

I trust that the DoD knows what they are doing. If Trump wants to commission more studies, I would support him if the studies were done according to the scientific method and not merely exercises in confirmation bias.

Did they do any studies in a combat environment such as Afghanistan? Or did they do their studies here stateside under perfect conditions…Any of these studies you so proudly post have been done in combat situations?

This is why I stressed the IDF studies earlier. Their military gets put into combat situations far more frequently than ours. Surveys of their soldiers, doctors and officers are quite revealing.

Mendez did a study of Canada and Australia and said further study is needed.
Which is precisely why the RAND corporation was contracted the following year to produce a more comprehensive study.
The only one I know of was a Navy Seal who did his thing after retirement.

It’s only been 13 months since the military was integrated. More anecdotes will come to light in due time.

Posted by: Warren Porter at July 31, 2017 10:58 PM
Comment #418907

Warped, we have 1 tranny who has seen combat and he/she did His/her thing after retiring. I would like numbers on how many trannies were put in combat that were studied in whatever country. IDF according to the L.A.Times says as of 2014 they have 5 transgender people. So how can a real assessment of combat with transgenders can 5 be? When you can come up with real numbers with combat experience from whatever country then you can try and convince me.

Posted by: Richard Kapitan at July 31, 2017 11:27 PM
Comment #418921

Well, Obama created the problem, and it was a problem. Obama did it for the purpose of destroying and disrupting America. It was part of his goal to fundamentally change America. We have multiple problems around the world and all Obama ever did was make more. And Trump comes along and fixes the problems. With a stroke of the pen, he undid Obama’s legacy. Make America great again. The left, including WP, start kicking and screaming at every action of Trump. Transgenders make up .03% of the American population; sorry, but they don’t deserve to tell the rest of America what they can and can’t do. The liberal left make up 25% and don’t get to either.

Posted by: Blaine at August 2, 2017 4:39 PM
Comment #418929
tell the rest of America what they can and can’t do

How does permitting a transgender soldier to serve “tell” the rest of us what we can and can’t do? Our Constitution protects people’s freedom to manage their own lives, but not the lives of others.

Meanwhile, we have 56 retired generals and admirals opposed to banning transgender people from serving. The same can be said for Admiral Paul Zukunft, commander of the Coast Guard.

Posted by: Warren Porter at August 2, 2017 10:14 PM
Comment #418938

This entire issue of gender confusion is the left making a mountain out of a mole hill(.03%). Warren Porter says the majority has no right to dictate to the minority when he says our constitution protects people’s freedom to manage their own lives, but not the lives of others. Does he feel the same way about a Christmas tree in the city square? How about the 10 commandments in a judge’s courtroom? What about smoking cigarettes on the street, or farming on land that happens to have a mouse on it?

It seems the left is really finicky about what subjects it chooses to define as people’s freedoms and how they manage their lives.

Posted by: Weary Willie at August 3, 2017 8:14 AM
Comment #418939

Perhaps WP DOES have a dog in this fight. Perhaps placing limits for transgenders is hitting pretty close to home for WP. Although I doubt that he is considering enlisting in the service of his country. WP thinks he’s unique in his thinking, but those of us who were draft age in the 60’s have seen the likes of WP’s kind. Most of them ran off to Canada.

Posted by: Blaine at August 3, 2017 9:16 AM
Comment #418940

Actually, it is quite simple. If the behavior adversely impacts other Americans, it is not merely an issue of managing one’s own life. Those adverse impacts make it an issue of managing other people’s lives too, and our Constitution forbids the management of other citizens’ lives without good reason.

Posted by: Warren Porter at August 3, 2017 9:30 AM
Comment #418941

Coming from the party that has made a career of managing everyone’s life.

Posted by: Blaine at August 3, 2017 10:18 AM
Comment #418942

Blaine, I am not a Republican.

Posted by: Warren Porter at August 3, 2017 11:23 AM
Comment #418945

No one has a right to be in the military, The military is NOT an equal opportunity employer. The military of this Nation does discriminate, but not by race or creed. It discriminates by Medical, Mental, and physical condition. When a person cannot determine what gender he/she is constitutes a mental issue.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at August 3, 2017 12:34 PM
Comment #418951

Rich KAPitan,

I’ve said this before, and I will say it again. Transgender people are just as mentally fit and physically fit to serve in the military, which is borne out in the overwhelming evidence from experts from within the military and outside.

Transgender people perform well under combat in Israel and they perform well deployed far from home in the British and Australian militaries. The US has integrated transsexual troops for over a year now and there have not been any significant problems. Trump and his supporters on Watchblog are making a mountain out of a molehill by targeting these people.

I cannot peer inside the minds of contrarians and discern their true motives, but my only guess at this point is that their primary concern is a desire to grind an axe against transgender people rather than ensure that the US military is the very best fighting force it can be.

Posted by: Warren Porter at August 3, 2017 1:56 PM
Comment #418958

Warped, Israel, British, and Australian militaries on all the times I have googled it FAILS to give numbers on how many Trangender they have studied in combat situations. As I said I like to know the numbers and how they preformed and was the study done prior to their prep to change or after. IDF as I stated above in #418907 in a L. A. times article in 2014 they only had 5 known trannies, that would NOT be to good of a study with only 5. In the U. S. military we have only 1 admitted Tranny who has seen combat and that would not be an accurate study. The only axe I would grind is if the Trannies only motive to join the military was to get the meds and surgeries needed when we have Veterans that need medical attention that have to wait for it and then it takes months to receive.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at August 3, 2017 2:54 PM
Comment #418959

Also Warped, I don’t care if we have Gays, Trannies or whatever in the military as long as they keep their $exual preferances to themselves and do their jobs. As soon as their needs get in the way of their jobs OUT they go.

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at August 3, 2017 2:58 PM
Comment #418966
As I said I like to know the numbers and how they preformed and was the study done prior to their prep to change or after.

My understanding is that last year’s change in transgender personnel policy was implemented in response to the aforementioned RAND study, which the military commissioned.

in 2014 they only had 5 known trannies, that would NOT be to good of a study with only 5

read more: The”>http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/1.803647”>The IDF says that at any given moment, dozens of transgender soldiers are serving.”

The only axe I would grind is if the Trannies only motive to join the military was to get the meds and surgeries needed when we have Veterans that need medical attention that have to wait for it and then it takes months to receive.

I am pretty confident people are not signing up to risk body and limb just so they can receive reassignment surgery. There are much easier ways to get those services as a civilian. If evidence comes to light suggesting that anyone is abusing the military to receive health services, then that warrants reevaluating things. But this holds for all soldiers with medical conditions, not just transgender folks.

As soon as their needs get in the way of their jobs OUT they go.
100% agreed. However, mere open acknolwedgement of one’s $exuality and gender identity is never going to interfere with one’s ability to do one’s job. Posted by: Warren Porter at August 3, 2017 5:01 PM
Comment #418967

The psychiatric community labeled transgender as a mental aberration until they were successfully lobbied by those with a personal agenda to change it.

Nothing changed medically. The label was removed by political pressure.

I don’t want someone who is confused about their own gender to have a rifle and ammo.

Posted by: Royal Flush at August 3, 2017 5:07 PM
Comment #418971

Warped, Actual numbers in any study would make your arguement. As far as the IDF, at any given moment dozen serve and at any given moment dozen disappear, again actual numbers would make your arguement. I don’t know who, an independent study, you would get to do a study in actual combat. I really don’t think many independent research firms want to go into a combat zone. Like I stated we really only know of one tranny that has seen combat.

Posted by: Richard Kapitan at August 3, 2017 5:36 PM
Comment #418974

RF,

The original classification was politically motivated and not based on the scientific method. That mistake was rectified recently.

KAP,

I don’t know who, an independent study, you would get to do a study in actual combat.

The independent researchers interviewed military personnel and their superior officers and asked questions about the performance of transgender personnel (including their performance in combat situations).

Posted by: Warren Porter at August 3, 2017 6:56 PM
Comment #418975

As usual, Warren won’t believe his own eyes and would rather believe what is aligned with his desires.

Posted by: Royal Flush at August 3, 2017 7:03 PM
Comment #418976

The political pressure causing the psychiatric community to succumb and change the medical definition of transgender is very similar to the tactics used by the UN bunch that publishes false climate data.

Our friends on the Left don’t care about facts or evidence or even the scientific method of inquiry. They seek capitulation to their default political position.

Bastardization of authority yields a Pyrrhic victory in their column as eventually, truth overcomes their efforts to conceal it. We see this happening today in the MMGW farce. They can not produce reliable data to sustain their contentions.

Forcing the medical community to redefine well recognized aberrant behavior as something else is counterfeit science.

Posted by: Royal Flush at August 3, 2017 7:29 PM
Comment #418977

Warped, Military men will say what they are ordered to say. When you have an independent study with numbers let us know.

Posted by: Richard Kapitanw at August 3, 2017 8:10 PM
Comment #418979

KAP,

The people interviewed in the RAND study were ordered to tell the truth as far as I can tell.


RF,

Get back to me when you are finished venting your sophistry and wish to rejoin us in the world of ration & reason. This idea that the change in the psychiatric classification is just bluster you’ve made up because you are unwiling to admit that you are wrong.

Posted by: Warren Porter at August 3, 2017 9:01 PM
Comment #418980

KAP,

The people interviewed in the RAND study were ordered to tell the truth as far as I can tell. This was before the military had made up ots mind regarding transgender soldiers. I trust the DoD to not bias the results.


RF,

Get back to me when you are finished venting your sophistry and wish to rejoin us in the world of ration & reason. This idea that the change in the psychiatric classification is just bluster you’ve made up because you are unwiling to admit that you are wrong.

Posted by: Warren Porter at August 3, 2017 9:03 PM
Comment #418981

Warped, The DoD is government they say what they are ordered to say. As far as a research study goes they say what the people who are paying them want them to say. Follow the money. You don’t buck your boss or benefactor.

Posted by: Richard Kapitan at August 3, 2017 9:18 PM
Comment #418982

The DoD funded the study. The DoD is in the business of winning wars, not bending to political whims. Therefore, I trust the results of the study to accurately reflect the people’s true beliefs.

Posted by: Warren Porter at August 3, 2017 9:33 PM
Comment #418983

Warped, How many transgenders did they study? The numbers will tell you alot, so how many, Warped?

Posted by: Richard Kapitan at August 3, 2017 9:35 PM
Comment #418984

Warped, The DoD answers to the President and the President at the time of the Study was Obama, the same president who let Transgenders in the military. The same President who said that we could keep our Doctor and Health coverage before passage of Obamacare. And you expect us to believe a study under his presidency?

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at August 3, 2017 9:52 PM
Comment #419004

Presidency

Posted by: Frank at August 4, 2017 11:27 AM
Comment #419030

Sorry Warren, but you are wrong. The definition of transgender was not changed for any medical reason.

Posted by: Royal Flush at August 4, 2017 7:35 PM
Comment #419045
Sorry Warren, but you are wrong. The definition of transgender was not changed for any medical reason.

It doesn’t matter how sorry you may be, but you are still wrong. You have shared not a single iota of evidence suggesting that the APA considered politics or anything other than science-based evidence when they revised their definitions. We already went through the same process with homosexuality. Religious moralists pushed their dogma onto the scientific community decades ago, incorrectly labeling homosexuality as a mental disorder.

How many transgenders did they study? The numbers will tell you alot, so how many, Warped?
I don’t have the time to find out. If you want to make a point, read the study yourself and count the number of transgender people and then we can talk. Until then, the idea that the number of people included in the study is statistically insignificant is nothing but idle speculation on your part.

Last point: This is going to be my final comment on this topic. So far, I have ignored a lot of insensitive language used here. Mostly because I did not want to get distracted by yet another discussion of “political correctness. Nevertheless, none of Watchblog’s conservatives have used the correct terminology (transgender person). Instead, we get the microaggressive nounification of the word transgender, which should only be used as an adjective, strictly speaking. Worse still, others used the outright derogatory term “tranny”.

I cannot tell if this was the result of prejudice or ignorance, but I suggest that if people want to be take seriously, that they dispense with such terminology. We are grown ups and should not have to settle for such abusive language.

Posted by: Warren Porter at August 5, 2017 9:54 AM
Comment #419049

Warped, So you don’t have time to look up numbers but you have time to look up a study that gives us absolutely no real information except that they studied Transgender persons in the military. You also brought up the IDF, which I at least found an article that stated an IDF General knew of 5 Transgender persons in the military in 2014. Most studies do give numbers of people studied so when you do have time do your thing

Posted by: Rich KAPitan at August 5, 2017 11:22 AM
Comment #419052

KAP,

The studies consist of interviews with transgender soldiers. I have the time to skim the conclusions and the contents of a few interviews. I do not have the time to scrutinize every single one in detail. If you want to take the time and count the interviews and report back, that is fine. But until you do so, your assumption that too few transgender soldiers exist to draw meaningful conclusions doesn’t hold water.

Already, I’ve demonstrated that the IDF says they have dozens of transgender personnel, far more than the number reported by the LA Times, so your continued repetition of the flawed number is nothing other than a demonstration of your obstinance and unwillingness to admit that you were wrong.

Posted by: Warren Porter at August 5, 2017 1:17 PM
Comment #419072

Those numbers should also point out if the transgender person was born that way or if they made the decision to have a surgery.

Posted by: Weary Willie at August 5, 2017 7:12 PM
Post a comment