April 10, 20214 yr 4 hours ago, Wentz_Era said: Same thing as any other debilitating medical condition in any front line job. Some people manage their issues better than others. For some, gender dysphoria may be debilitating, as you say. For others, it may be more akin to managing anxiety. The point is you take it on a case by case basis, you don't apply legal or institutional discrimination. That's pretty damn un-American, if you ask me.
April 10, 20214 yr 19 minutes ago, EaglesRocker97 said: Ok, so just because someone has a mental health condition, they can't be expected ever properly function with a firearm? Seems like a blanket statement in need of evidence to support such a contention, because there are certainly many soldiers in the military right now managing some kind of mental health ailment and serving admirably. 15 minutes ago, EaglesRocker97 said: Some people manage their issues better than others. For some, gender dysphoria may be debilitating, as you say. For others, it may be more akin to managing anxiety. The point is you take it on a case by case basis, you don't apply legal or institutional discrimination. That's pretty damn un-American, if you ask me. I don't want to go down the rabbit hole on this, but short answer yes...long answer no. I function with PTSD, others don't. Like I said before there's clear black and white when it comes to can you arm or not. Then there's grey areas listed where it's at the discretion of the 'arming officials'. When you're in the grey area it's generally in the treatable realms. Black and white is the ya you can't function stuff or you're a danger to yourself or others. Also it isn't discrimination, you forfeit a lot of freedom by raising your hand to join the military. It's just the nature of the beast. It isn't some happy kumbaya utopia, there's a purpose and end state desired. You either fall in line or you don't.
April 10, 20214 yr 26 minutes ago, Wentz_Era said: I don't want to go down the rabbit hole on this, but short answer yes...long answer no. I function with PTSD, others don't. Like I said before there's clear black and white when it comes to can you arm or not. Then there's grey areas listed where it's at the discretion of the 'arming officials'. When you're in the grey area it's generally in the treatable realms. Black and white is the ya you can't function stuff or you're a danger to yourself or others. Also it isn't discrimination, you forfeit a lot of freedom by raising your hand to join the military. It's just the nature of the beast. It isn't some happy kumbaya utopia, there's a purpose and end state desired. You either fall in line or you don't. Damn. Here I thought it was just drum circles and LSD. Was about to enlist.
April 10, 20214 yr 29 minutes ago, Wentz_Era said: I don't want to go down the rabbit hole on this, but short answer yes...long answer no. I function with PTSD, others don't. Like I said before there's clear black and white when it comes to can you arm or not. Then there's grey areas listed where it's at the discretion of the 'arming officials'. When you're in the grey area it's generally in the treatable realms. Black and white is the ya you can't function stuff or you're a danger to yourself or others. So, then it sounds like, just like in any other case, it should left to a case-by-base basis on whether someone's condition is treatable/manageable to the point that they can function as a member of the military. They can be weeded out through the protocols and evaluations like anyone else, no need to categorically ban someone based on a particular mental health condition. 31 minutes ago, Wentz_Era said: Also it isn't discrimination, you forfeit a lot of freedom by raising your hand to join the military. It's just the nature of the beast. It isn't some happy kumbaya utopia, there's a purpose and end state desired. You either fall in line or you don't. Except it is discrimination. The prejudicial logic being applied here isn't much different than whats been used to ban gays or black people from serving before. Even your final statement elicits a bias that isn't really grounded in fact. Where do you get the idea that every transgender person is a weakling looking to sit around a campfire singing kumbaya? Kind of a weird stereotype that you're using to back these assertions.
April 10, 20214 yr 6 minutes ago, EaglesRocker97 said: So, then it sounds like, just like in any other case, it should left to a case-by-base basis on whether someone's condition is treatable/manageable to the point that they can function as a member of the military. They can be weeded out through the protocols and evaluations like anyone else, no need to categorically ban someone based on a particular mental health condition. Except it is discrimination. The prejudicial logic being applied here isn't much different than whats been used to ban gays or black people from serving before. Even your final statement elicits a bias that isn't really grounded in fact. Where do you get the idea that every transgender person is a weakling looking to sit around a campfire singing kumbaya? Kind of a weird stereotype that you're using to back these assertions. Not at all what I said. I'm not trying to have a holier than thou type attitude here so don't take it that way, but it's something you wouldn't understand without being there when it comes to how the military works and functions. I certainly get from your standpoint where you opinion and questions come from though.
April 10, 20214 yr 19 minutes ago, rambo said: Damn. Here I thought it was just drum circles and LSD. Was about to enlist. In the Marines, yes😆
April 10, 20214 yr The entire military mindset is different. Soldiers are replaceable parts, each with their own mil-spec. Trained capabilities are what really matters. In many ways, it is the least discriminatory job around. I believe this is what is wrong with making separate tests for men and women. That is sexist and discriminatory. The job dictates the requirements. Men can fight. Women can fight. Trans can fight. The physical part of it can be obtained by almost anyone. The talent, mindset and aptitude are another thing entirely. The military is only just coming into the 60s as far as mental illness. They admit it exists. It is still viewed as weakness by the majority, is my guess. Cosmetic surgery in the military is probably on par with limb replacements, which they still can't get right, for some stupid reason. For on the job related injury, this is probably not an issue. Gender change, no matter how driving the psychological need, is still elective. IMHO
April 11, 20214 yr On 4/10/2021 at 8:18 AM, EaglesRocker97 said: None, why the hell does it matter? It doesn’t I was just curious if you were looking at it from a civilian background or a military one. Nothing wrong with either, after all the military is designed to have civilian oversight. Honestly things are a balancing act. Ultimately people tend to lose sight of the fact that the military exists for the specific job of winning wars, which is largely done though killing. Any policy or procedure that detracts from this, no matter how right or wrong it is, needs to not be implemented. If someone being trans has no bearing on a units job, then who gives a ish. If it detracts, then don’t do it. I think it may be a case by case basis thing. Ultimately at the end of the day DoD leadership is faltering right now with a whole multitude of things. Mil meme pages on Instagram are currently ishing all over leadership for lack of judgement on a multitude of issues. IMO current leadership across the board isn’t equipped to handle large decisions
May 3, 20214 yr Author So not exactly military obviously, but fits in nicely here. Is the overt politicization of the CIA a good thing?
May 3, 20214 yr Just catching up on this thread after it was bumped - gotta love ishlib history teachers arguing with guys who actually served their country about how things are/should be in the military. That's why I keep coming back for more mEnTAl HeAltH sHouLD bE scREenED bEfoRE yOU PuRchASe a GuN also JuST beCauSE yoU hAvE mEnTAl iSSuEs doEsNT mEaN yOu cAn'T hAndLE a fiReARm iN tHe mIlitARy Truly amazing.
May 5, 20214 yr On 5/3/2021 at 9:03 AM, Kz! said: So not exactly military obviously, but fits in nicely here. Is the overt politicization of the CIA a good thing? I am sure they are for desk accounting jobs and not out in the field
May 5, 20214 yr On 4/10/2021 at 7:47 AM, Toastrel said: The entire military mindset is different. Soldiers are replaceable parts, each with their own mil-spec. Trained capabilities are what really matters. In many ways, it is the least discriminatory job around. I believe this is what is wrong with making separate tests for men and women. That is sexist and discriminatory. The job dictates the requirements. Men can fight. Women can fight. Trans can fight. The physical part of it can be obtained by almost anyone. The talent, mindset and aptitude are another thing entirely. The military is only just coming into the 60s as far as mental illness. They admit it exists. It is still viewed as weakness by the majority, is my guess. Cosmetic surgery in the military is probably on par with limb replacements, which they still can't get right, for some stupid reason. For on the job related injury, this is probably not an issue. Gender change, no matter how driving the psychological need, is still elective. IMHO One of your better posts toast. I think it is anyways. Trying to find something I disagree w/. Lol
May 5, 20214 yr K 2 hours ago, DaEagles4Life said: I am sure they are for desk accounting jobs and not out in the field Has to be. But either way that "woke” lady is proud of her CIA affiliation. which is strange considering the CIA’s history and her "wokeness” clashes in every aspect
May 5, 20214 yr On 5/3/2021 at 9:13 AM, mikemack8 said: Just catching up on this thread after it was bumped - gotta love ishlib history teachers arguing with guys who actually served their country about how things are/should be in the military. That's why I keep coming back for more Oh, yeah, because I'm sure no one with any mental health condition has ever made a good soldier before. On 5/3/2021 at 9:13 AM, mikemack8 said: JuST beCauSE yoU hAvE mEnTAl iSSuEs doEsNT mEaN yOu cAn'T hAndLE a fiReARm iN tHe mIlitARy Right, because all mental health conditions are the same. Whether one's condition or history of mental illness is violent or non-violent makes no difference at all when it comes to firearms On 5/3/2021 at 9:13 AM, mikemack8 said: Truly amazing. What's truly amazing is what a pathetic moron you are and how sad it is watching you constantly groveling for approval from the CVON village idiot.
May 5, 20214 yr 2 hours ago, DaEagles4Life said: I am sure they are for desk accounting jobs and not out in the field Great, so the bureaucratic wing of our intelligence services is turning into pronoun brigade. What could possibly go wrong?
May 5, 20214 yr 10 hours ago, EaglesRocker97 said: Oh, yeah, because I'm sure no one with any mental health condition has ever made a good soldier before. Right, because all mental health conditions are the same. Whether one's condition or history of mental illness is violent or non-violent makes no difference at all when it comes to firearms What's truly amazing is what a pathetic moron you are and how sad it is watching you constantly groveling for approval from the CVON village idiot. I'm not groveling for anything - I mainly try to trigger libs, just like @Kz! Looks like I was successful yet again. Also - Jimi Hendrix is overrated.
May 5, 20214 yr 13 minutes ago, mikemack8 said: I'm not groveling for anything - I mainly try to trigger libs, just like @Kz! Looks like I was successful yet again. Not really, but I know how it goes. Anytime someone disagrees with or hits back at the right-wing trolls, we're just "Triggered." Classic CVON 13 minutes ago, mikemack8 said: Also - Jimi Hendrix is overrated. Depends on the context. He wasn't the most technically skilled guitarist of all time, a lot of blues guitarists weren't. They played purely from feel/emotion. Guys like Vai and Satriani were more cerebral and blow him away in terms of their knowledge of theory and the breadth of their skill/style, but they were also directly inspired by Hendrix. You can still argue Jimi was the greatest ever because of influence. He propelled rock music into a totally new realm that influenced countless acts that followed him. The created sounds that had literally never been heard before and a persona that many tried to imitate but never reproduced. He was genuine and he was innovative. I'd still consider Jimi the greatest ever, but in terms of "the best," that depends on your criteria.
May 5, 20214 yr Well, that certainly doesn't fit the narrative: Quote Two-thirds of troops support allowing transgender service members in the military, Pentagon study finds A Defense Department-funded study published Feb. 18 in the journal Sexuality Research and Social Policy has found that about 66 percent of active-duty soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines support the idea of serving alongside transgender personnel. Breaking down data from nearly 500 responses, researchers found that across demographics ― regardless of ethnicity, sexuality or gender ― more than half of every group also supported allowing transgender Americans to serving in the military. "Arguments against integration have been historically disproven through research examining the integration of women, racial/ethnic minorities and [lesbian, gay and bisexual] persons into the U.S. military,” the study authors wrote, comparing the transgender ban to past bans on service for other demographics. On April 12, the Pentagon drew a line in the sand, barring any current service members from transitioning to their preferred gender, while banning any transgender recruits unless they submit to serving as their biological sex. The policy is a complete reversal of Obama administration’s 2016 lifting of the ban on transgender service members, after which DoD rolled out policies allowing existing troops to serve openly and work out a transition plan with their doctors, if they chose. In July 2017, President Trump sent out a trio of tweets announcing his intention to undo that policy, which went into effect nearly two years later, following multiple federal lawsuits and proposed bills in Congress. The Pentagon commissioned the study to look at troops’ attitudes. From August 2017 to March 2018, researchers collected 486 responses, starting with seed service members who recruited their coworkers and acquaintances, then expanding the scope through advertising with popular military blogs and social media accounts. They were asked, "Should transgender people be allowed to serve in the military?” and given the options of yes, no, unsure and decline to answer, with the "unsure” responses routed into the "no” results. Participants ranged in age from 18 to 54 and were made up of 41 percent soldiers, 35 percent airmen, 14 percent sailors and 9 percent Marines. Of those, 57 percent of respondents were white, 60 percent were heterosexual and 66 percent were male. Beyond that, 75 percent of women and 81 percent of gay, lesbian and bisexual respondents showed support, while heterosexuals polled at 56 percent and men at 62 percent, with black, Latino and white respondents at 69 percent, 75 percent and 64 percent, respectively. Opponents of transgender service members have argued that their medical and psychological needs degrade readiness and unit cohesion ― particularly if they are diagnosed with gender dysphoria, a type of anxiety associated with feeling one’s mind doesn’t match one’s body. A similar argument propped up the "don’t ask, don’t tell” ban on homosexual troops until 2011, though research post-integration has shown no measurable differences. "For example, a study published just over one year after the repeal of DADT found no overall negative impact from the repeal on morale, retention, unit cohesion or readiness to serve, and instead found that the repeal enhanced the military’s capacity to pursue its missions,” according to the study, citing research published in the journal Armed Forces & Society. That study found that being able to openly serve, without the pressure to hide identities, improved morale among troops and their units. Last year, the Democratic-controlled House of Representatives approved language in the 2020 National Defense Authorization Act that would have reversed Trump’s policy, but it did not survive in the final, Senate-approved version enacted in late December. House Armed Services Committee chairman Rep. Adam Smith, D-Wash., has vowed to revisit the issue in 2020. "Even if we know (Senate Armed Services Committee chairman) Sen. Jim Inhofe and Donald Trump won’t change their minds, do we want to take another run at it and how?” Smith, told Defense News in December. "We’ll be discussing that with a lot of people.” https://www.militarytimes.com/news/your-military/2020/02/27/two-thirds-of-troops-support-allowing-transgender-service-members-in-the-military-pentagon-study-finds/
May 5, 20214 yr 25 minutes ago, Kz! said: Today in woke military: Good for them for not having to hide who they are. Not sure how someone's sexuality affects their ability to fly a helo. Let's hear all about your time in the military and your willingness to serve.
May 5, 20214 yr 21 minutes ago, DaEagles4Life said: Good for them for not having to hide who they are. Not sure how someone's sexuality affects their ability to fly a helo. Let's hear all about your time in the military and your willingness to serve.
Create an account or sign in to comment