America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

Last post 6 years ago by frankj1. 206 replies replies.
5 Pages<12345>
Obama's Transgenders kicked out...
bgz Offline
#151 Posted:
Joined: 07-29-2014
Posts: 13,023
frankj1 wrote:
I think 40% is a huge number, but I also think that it should at least be taken into consideration that many have endured bullying and other forms of prejudice in their formative years, so maybe the stats are not as clean for them as a "pure" group...cuz I think most would agree that bullied people may have high rates of attempted suicide or other behaviors that fall under the generic "depressed" category.

TW has been saying that as the years go by, more becomes known and understood about how they "happen", less sensationalism, etc., it's likely that this era will be recalled much the same way as the times in history that it was unthinkable for Blacks, Asians, gays to ever be accepted at all, never mind the military.

I'd be outraged if one entered the military as a means to secure financed surgery, but I am equally amazed that no one is able to believe that even people so different than the rest of us couldn't truly be Patriots willing to die for the country they love, the country where all are granted the same rights...on paper anyway (or was it parchment?)




Frank, I get your emotional reasoning to why the number is what it is, that I'm not trying to dispute or even take in to consideration for my argument.

My point is, the military is no place for such arguments. The numbers don't lie, how the numbers came to be is irrelevant. The only thing that should be taken into consideration is that almost half of the demographic are mentally unstable, that's enough reason alone to disqualify them from service.

DrafterX Offline
#152 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,506
I blame television for gay-homoism.... they're trying to induce into everyday life and make it acceptable or even normal... Not talking
bgz Offline
#153 Posted:
Joined: 07-29-2014
Posts: 13,023
Well, I don't care if people are gay / trans / it / etc (I could GAF less), but I don't want a mentally unstable portion of the population to be wielding advanced weaponry around other soldiers.

I mean, it's going to happen, but if you can decrease the probability of it happening by disallowing groups known to be fked up in the head from joining, then that's a good thing.

dstieger Offline
#154 Posted:
Joined: 06-22-2007
Posts: 10,889
bgz wrote:
Well, I don't care if people are gay / trans / it / etc (I could GAF less), but I don't want a mentally unstable portion of the population to be wielding advanced weaponry around other soldiers.

I mean, it's going to happen, but if you can decrease the probability of it happening by disallowing groups known to be fked up in the head from joining, then that's a good thing.



I'm pretty sure there's rules or policies meant to prevent "mentally unstable" from signing up. "groups known to be fked up in the head" is going to be a rather troublesome definition for some policy writer.

If the idea is just to keep the nut-jobs out, then I don't know that we need to have a sub-part that specifies transgenders.

TBH, I'm was surprised by, and now very tired of, all the talk about legislating what people can/cannot do based on their personal views on their own gender identity. Ever since the first 'bathroom bills', I have been pretty perplexed. I wish our administration and lawmakers had something more important they could be working on.
victor809 Offline
#155 Posted:
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
I think what dstieg said is what TW was trying to say... we already don't allow mentally unstable people in the military, or they get drummed out. If someone is suicidal, they'll get removed whether it's because they're trans or for any other reason someone may have for killing themselves.

40% about matches with what I was reading... I don't doubt that number. But if there is a non zero percent which is actually mentally stable (well adjusted, plays well with others etc) then disallowing the entire group is a lazy stereotype.. deal with people as individuals as we already do for the non trans people. If they're fit as an individual good. If they're not fit as an individual, then the military has a process for that.
DrafterX Offline
#156 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,506
but they claim discrimination and stuff... Mellow
bgz Offline
#157 Posted:
Joined: 07-29-2014
Posts: 13,023
Ya, as soon as you let the PC police start getting their way, then all the petty lawsuits start flying with the military walking on eggshells around any topic relating to LGBT issues.

FK that, you guys just don't get it, 40% is a really big FKing number. Done trying to explain it.
DrafterX Offline
#158 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,506
well, it is less than half... Mellow
bgz Offline
#159 Posted:
Joined: 07-29-2014
Posts: 13,023
I don't like your attitude.
DrafterX Offline
#160 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,506
Laugh
DrMaddVibe Offline
#161 Posted:
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,301
bgz wrote:
Ya, as soon as you let the PC police start getting their way, then all the petty lawsuits start flying with the military walking on eggshells around any topic relating to LGBT issues.

FK that, you guys just don't get it, 40% is a really big FKing number. Done trying to explain it.


I don't think anyone here has a problem with your 40% number. It's not more than 50% but like you explained it's a high number and it's not gone down over time...nor gone up. It raises awareness to the facts that there are some that will attempt to kill themselves. It's sad really. Were they going to kill themselves if they didn't get bullied or into the military? Were they if they didn't get mommy and daddy's approval? I don't know. All I know is that they were going to do it regardless of what we type here.

I stand by my OP on this thread. If they're confused to the point that they don't know which bathroom to use...they are NOT going to follow orders. Following orders is paramount for the military. If they say take the hill, you take the hill. If they say to attack, you attack. You don't second guess their meaning and you don't think or act on your own judgement. You carry out your orders per the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). Everyone is trained on the UCMJ...EVERYONE. From Bootcamp, AIT and permanent duty station you follow orders. Some you won't like, some you will but you WILL carry them out or face punishment. Yes, you face punishment. Create a disturbance enough times for your branch of service, division, platoon or squad and you will be removed. You will have rank stripped away and yes in some cases you will find yourself in military prison. When I was stationed in Germany we were assigned barracks that were across the street from the European Theater prison. They made big rocks into little rocks and carried them from one side of the facility to another. There was no cable tv or any niceties that a civilian prison will have. I'm quite sure the suicide rate is rather high for individuals that find themselves there to begin with...then add the stigma they're personally dealing with on top of that? No. The military just isn't the place to play with duct tape and lipstick. They're assigned to defend, kill and destroy. That's the basic function of the military. It isn't some social experiment laboratory. So, as you can see by my very basic explanation...that 40% could be a LOT higher if the military is reduced to having to deal with these issues.
victor809 Offline
#162 Posted:
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
Bgz... I have not decided where I land on this topic, I think it is way more complex than most of the individuals who think they solved the problem in 1 sentence understand. But that being said, when you're restricting an individual based on the odds that they might be unfit due to group statistics, and then defending it by saying that you can't allow it to start because there will be PC lawsuits, I simply don't think you have a good argument.

Yes 40% is huge. And that in itself is tragic. But that same argument can be made to keep many groups out of the military. Find a religious, ethnic or sexual identity group, find a statistic that occurs more often in that group which makes one unfit for service (health, felony convictions, whatever) and apply it to the entire group. My argument is simply we treat people as individuals and measure their fitness for service that way... heck, if they're treated as individuals maybe fewer will kill themselves.
bgz Offline
#163 Posted:
Joined: 07-29-2014
Posts: 13,023
Victor, like DMV said, the military isn't the place for social experiments. There's plenty of places for them to be treated as individuals, I just don't think the military is one of them. Also, I think the underlying mental condition has more to do with their suicide attempt rate than anything else... Weird sh1t happens when you have screwed up wires and/or your neurons aren't firing correctly.

My reasoning behind the 40% number is that's the ones who try it. With a number like that, I'm guessing the number that have suicidal tendencies is going to be damn near 100%.

My lawsuit argument was just an add on argument... I know I'm not a big fan of being sued, waste of time and resources.
delta1 Offline
#164 Posted:
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,753
this kinda reminds me of the discussions about whether women should be allowed to serve in the military, in combat zones...
delta1 Offline
#165 Posted:
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,753
I've never served in the military, but from knowing many that have, I would hazard a guess that the institution is great enough to utilize people for what they have between their ears, and not for what they have between their legs...those that don't meet minimum standards will be discharged...
DrafterX Offline
#166 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,506
well then let's assume they make it through boot camp and pass aptitude tests and such... is it then OK for the gubment to pay for their sex change operations..?? Huh
delta1 Offline
#167 Posted:
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,753
No. I don't think it should be a policy for the US military to pay for medical treatment that did not arise from the service.
dstieger Offline
#168 Posted:
Joined: 06-22-2007
Posts: 10,889
delta1 wrote:
this kinda reminds me of the discussions about whether women should be allowed to serve in the military, in combat zones...


delta1 wrote:
this kinda reminds me of the discussions about whether blacks should be allowed to serve in the military, in combat zones...

delta1 wrote:
this kinda reminds me of the discussions about whether gays should be allowed to serve in the military, in combat zones...

delta1 wrote:
this kinda reminds me of the discussions about whether Jews should be allowed to serve in the military, in combat zones...


delta1 wrote:
this kinda reminds me of the discussions about whether American Indians should be allowed to serve in the military, in combat zones...



DrafterX Offline
#169 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,506
I guess if a grenade blew his balls off we should try to do somethin... Mellow
delta1 Offline
#170 Posted:
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,753
Does anyone know whether or not the military currently has a policy to pay for medical treatment for conditions that existed before the person entered the service...pre-existing conditions? I think that should be the standard.
dstieger Offline
#171 Posted:
Joined: 06-22-2007
Posts: 10,889
I don't know if there's a specific policy. I do know that if you make it through pre-enlistment medical screenings and then something (not consciously concealed) needs medical attention....well...it depends. If you're deemed to have good potential for continued positive contribution to the service...well, they'll do what they can, including corrective surgeries. If performance is less that great, there may be some medical holds, delays, boards in your future...and decisions to cut may seem almost arbitrary at times.

So...if you have a hernia (or tumor, or whatever) that you don't even know about and enlist and discover it later...you'll likely get it taken care of as long as you aren't a total ****-bag.
delta1 Offline
#172 Posted:
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,753
That seems to be a rational and realistic way to decide...
bgz Offline
#173 Posted:
Joined: 07-29-2014
Posts: 13,023
To play of dstieger's approach

delta1 wrote:
this kinda reminds me of the discussions about whether people with clinical mental disorders should be allowed to serve in the military, in combat zones...


This is what we're discussing here. People tend to come off the assembly line defective, not all defects are created equal. We all have them, but not all of us have a strong desire to mutilate ourselves...

(and no I'm not calling the ability/inability to pigment or having a vagina a defect)

dstieger Offline
#174 Posted:
Joined: 06-22-2007
Posts: 10,889
I guess it still boils down to my question about assumptions a ways up in the thread. If you believe that a transgender is, by definition, mentally challenged, you will likely fall into one camp. I am on the fence (move over, TW), but I admit that I have somewhat recently moved away from believing that transgender-ness is simply a conscious (choice) state of mind.
DrafterX Offline
#175 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,506
Television is brain washing them... Mellow
Brewha Offline
#176 Posted:
Joined: 01-25-2010
Posts: 12,143
You mean FoxNews??? OhMyGod
delta1 Offline
#177 Posted:
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,753
I heard that Fox News has a direct correlation to the increase in the transgender suicide rate...Cursing Scared
bgz Offline
#178 Posted:
Joined: 07-29-2014
Posts: 13,023
I would guess the rate would jump more if they read this thread.

Which would ironically prove my point.

Until this post, which would motivate them to prove me wrong ( which is a good thing :)
tailgater Offline
#179 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
I think it would be cool kicking North Korea's butt with an army full of trans.

Just sayin.

frankj1 Offline
#180 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,211
tailgater wrote:
I think it would be cool kicking North Korea's butt with an army full of trans.

Just sayin.


awesome!
teedubbya Offline
#181 Posted:
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
I'd be worried about Drafter pulling a groin

and stuffed....
dstieger Offline
#182 Posted:
Joined: 06-22-2007
Posts: 10,889
All wearing fatty suits, dear leader masks and high heels
DrMaddVibe Offline
#183 Posted:
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,301
tailgater wrote:
I think it would be cool kicking North Korea's butt with an army full of trans.

Just sayin.



General Rodman reporting for duty!!!

http://www.theprovincepodcasts.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Dennis_Rodman_in_drag.jpg
DrafterX Offline
#184 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,506
You think Fatty Fat Fat dresses up too..?? Huh
delta1 Offline
#185 Posted:
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,753
Yup...I heard he is actually a bull dycke in a military outfit...
DrafterX Offline
#186 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,506
I heard he dresses as Michelle Obama... Mellow
frankj1 Offline
#187 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,211
transvestites may not be transgendered
Speyside Offline
#188 Posted:
Joined: 03-16-2015
Posts: 13,106
What would Tim Curry say?
DrMaddVibe Offline
#189 Posted:
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,301
frankj1 wrote:
transvestites may not be transgendered



Too much over the line?
frankj1 Offline
#190 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,211
DrMaddVibe wrote:
Too much over the line?

in some ways it may be more of a fetish and less of a genetic predisposition...

I suspect none of us who don't have to live with it have any idea.
DrafterX Offline
#191 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,506
Victor has given us some insight... Mellow
victor809 Offline
#192 Posted:
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
https://www.buzzfeed.com/dominicholden/joint-chiefs-transgender?utm_term=.df22N6XLGE#.ro4PzZQpwM

So apparenlty trump lied again....
bgz Offline
#193 Posted:
Joined: 07-29-2014
Posts: 13,023
Forgot about this one, apparently I was hell bent on talking you guys into my position.
victor809 Offline
#194 Posted:
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
bgz wrote:
Forgot about this one, apparently I was hell bent on talking you guys into my position.


kinky
Speyside Offline
#195 Posted:
Joined: 03-16-2015
Posts: 13,106
Well, what is your favorite position with transgenders?
bgz Offline
#196 Posted:
Joined: 07-29-2014
Posts: 13,023
From reading the above, apparently any position that's not on a battlefield :D

victor809 Offline
#197 Posted:
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
bgz wrote:
From reading the above, apparently any position that's not on a battlefield :D



Trying to keep the transgenders out of the army so you can recruit them for your "Sex Army" eh?....



....niiiiccceeee.....
frankj1 Offline
#198 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,211
victor809 wrote:
Trying to keep the transgenders out of the army so you can recruit them for your "Sex Army" eh?....



....niiiiccceeee.....

strictly in the name of science
bgz Offline
#199 Posted:
Joined: 07-29-2014
Posts: 13,023
Frankie Tripod is right... it is in the name of science, and unfortunately the pleasure will not be mine, as we intend to convert Frankie into a human sybian by strapping a giant sonic motor to his azz.

I'm not sure what the hell we'll be testing for, I'll leave that to the egg heads.
RMAN4443 Offline
#200 Posted:
Joined: 09-29-2016
Posts: 7,683
bgz wrote:
Frankie Tripod is right... it is in the name of science, and fortunately the pleasure will be all mine, as I intend to convert Frankie into a human sybian by strapping a giant sonic motor to his azz.

I'm not sure what the hell we'll be testing for, butt I really really really think I'm gonna enjoy it, in a purely erotic way.


Freak Not talking
Users browsing this topic
Guest
5 Pages<12345>