Search this blog

Monday, 31 July 2017

Trump's Trans Ban


Like everyone else, I was shocked by this. Why the fuck would you ban transgender people from joining the military? That's like banning women, mexicans, bisexual people - the fuck? However, a little research explains why. Basically, the military has to fund expensive gender reassignment surgeries for soldiers currently undergoing transition. I don't believe it is the place of the military to fund any kind of expensive surgery; the US healthcare system should take care of that. (Luckily for us Brits, we have the NHS).

Additionally, trans people have higher levels of anxiety and suicide rates than non-trans people. I don't think a person who is physically or emotionally crippled in any way should join the military. I know I certainly wouldn't because I'm in recovery for alcoholism and I have depression and suffer from panic attacks. Not being in a position to give the best possible service means it makes sense to not join.

BUT - I think if a person has already transitioned and is on hormones, and are physically and emotionally healthy, then there is nothing wrong with them joining the military. That goes for anyone. I'm not pro-war and think the government uses too much of taxpayers money funding the fucking military and nuclear weapons, but that's another topic. If a trans person is already serving in the military and is not in an emotionally unstable state, then discharging them because they are trans is appalling.
http://dailysignal.com/2017/07/26/why-forcing-the-military-to-pay-for-sex-changes-would-be-disastrous/
https://heatst.com/life/gender-reassignment-cost/
http://edition.cnn.com/2017/07/26/politics/trump-military-transgender/index.html

4 comments:

  1. It's not really like banning "women, mexicans, bisexual people" for many reasons.

    1.) "Transgenders" are less than 1% of the US population. All those other groups (except bisexuals) make up a large amount of people.

    2.) "Gender dysphoria" is recognized by professionals and in a US court of law as a mental illness. So it would be more like banning people who are bipolar or border personality disorder etc.

    3.) The military is a place where you are stripped of your identity and completely conform to being just another soldier. That is just the way of "war". It's not the place for someone to find their identity and if they get any special treatment when it comes to housing or shower accommodations etc., this can serve to offend and upset the rest of the soldiers.

    4.) What you said about the cost and burden of cost.

    "I don't think a person who is physically or emotionally crippled in any way should join the military."

    I agree. The vast majority of people are not cut out for the military.

    "BUT - I think if a person has already transitioned and is on hormones, and are physically and emotionally healthy, then there is nothing wrong with them joining the military."

    That's the problem with the word "transgender" though. At this point, they've become the gender they wanted to be. The "problem" should be "solved". No "gender dysphoria" anymore.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Exactly. I think the liberal outrage over this is tremendous. People don't get that most people are not trans. And it is so true that the military should not be a place to find your identity. What do you think about this trans bathroom issue? I don't really know to be honest. If you look and act like a girl and have female genitalia then yeah, use the girl's bathroom. But if you clearly look and act like a guy and claim to be a girl to use the female bathroom then it's like, well, how do we know you're not just lying to perve on girls, or going through some teen angst face? I support people's right to transition and having gender dysphoria must be awful, and of course trans people should just be treated with the same humanity as everyone else. But I don't like the fact that it's blown up into this huge big deal.

      Delete
    2. I think that since less than 1% of the US population is transgender, there shouldn't be a "bathroom issue". If people really want to construct bathrooms to appeal to less than 1% of the population, then I would advise them to create single-stall bathrooms - that way there's no worry about perverts taking advantage of the "bathroom issue".

      Delete
  2. I just want to say in America, something like 23% of Americans have no religious affiliation yet we never talk about those people yet transgenders at the highest estimates only make up about 0.6% yet they get much more media attention. That should show people just how political and biased it is.

    I think businesses should be allowed to make whatever bathroom they want, as long as they have bathrooms that everyone can use. If that means 1 bathroom for all people, 2 bathrooms for each gender or 3 bathrooms for more options etc. then whatever. As long as taxpayers don't have to pay for it. I think that entire issue was such a waste of time and something made up to fill up TV air time.

    That being said, if a bathroom is allowing both genders then I think it should be made in single-stall styles so males and females won't have to occupy it at the same time. I do not like the idea of giving adult perverts/pedophiles an extra chance of indulging their fantasies in the bathrooms.

    ReplyDelete

If you enjoy my posts check out my novel Every Last Psycho. Available to purchase on Amazon: https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B07F44CMNJ