Pentagon Lifts Ban on Trans Service Members
June 30, 2016 11:27 AM   Subscribe

U.S. Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter has announced that the U.S. military will lift its ban on trans people serving openly.

Details of the new policy are still being worked out, but effective immediately, involuntary discharges based solely on a servicemember's trans status are being halted. The move follows a meeting Carter had with trans service members representing each branch of the military last week. Some are saying that the planned timeline is too short and lacking in details, but Carter's announcement is seen to reflect his frustration at foot-dragging by the services after he declared his intention nearly a year ago to end the bar.
posted by Etrigan (29 comments total) 23 users marked this as a favorite
 
Williams Institute: Approximately 0.6% of adults in the United States, or 1.4 million individuals, identify as transgender.

It’s estimated that over 134,000 American veterans are transgender, and over 15,000 trans people are serving in military (cite).
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 11:34 AM on June 30, 2016 [5 favorites]


Well, no matter what one thinks of the military, this is s a step forward, encouraging businesses to follow.
posted by happyroach at 11:44 AM on June 30, 2016 [8 favorites]


This is good news, I know a few trans people who joined the military as a way to "cure it" and I'm glad that they'll have support there.

Hopefully this means some good news for veterans and Chelsea Manning as well.
posted by Annika Cicada at 11:46 AM on June 30, 2016 [16 favorites]


Thanks, Obama!
posted by Cookiebastard at 11:47 AM on June 30, 2016 [11 favorites]


Yeah, my first thoughts were of Chelsea Manning, too.
posted by GenjiandProust at 11:48 AM on June 30, 2016


This though is kind of irritating:

...the plan also says that people with gender dysphoria, a history of medical treatments associated with gender transition and those who have had reconstruction surgery may be disqualified as military recruits unless a medical provider certifies that they have been clinically stable in the preferred gender for 18 months, and are free of significant distress or impairment in social, occupational or other important areas. They also said transgender individuals receiving hormone therapy must have been stable on the medication for 18 months.

"Stable". Do cis people on hormone therapies receive the same scrutiny? I really do not know and I'm asking sincerely.
posted by Annika Cicada at 11:51 AM on June 30, 2016 [2 favorites]


Do cis people on hormone therapies receive the same scrutiny? I really do not know and I'm asking sincerely.

I would assume yes. The military doesn't want recruits that cannot handle basic from a medical standpoint, and there are a lot of ways to get bounced - for example, being on antidepressants was a disqualification for a long time.
posted by NoxAeternum at 11:55 AM on June 30, 2016 [12 favorites]


"Stable". Do cis people on hormone therapies receive the same scrutiny? I really do not know and I'm asking sincerely.

I also wonder what "stable" means. One reading of that paragraph screams RLE and another means "no longer adjusting one's hormone dosage regularly because you've found a dose that works".
posted by hoyland at 11:56 AM on June 30, 2016 [2 favorites]


It's definitely unclear wording, yes.

It looks like taking the Pill is okay so long as it's prescribed (could find nothing about needing to be "stable" or what "stable" would mean): Be careful with medication you take: Your military career depends on it.

And pregnant women in the Navy actually have to demonstrate "overriding and compelling factors of personal need" in order to leave before their enlistment is up. Same article notes that personnel are encouraged to use birth control.
In addition to emphasizing the importance of condoms, birth control pills and other methods of contraception, the Navy also makes available emergency contraceptive pills for use within 72 hours of unprotected sex. The pills are available at every Navy medical clinic and hospital.
posted by fraula at 12:01 PM on June 30, 2016 [2 favorites]


I think that part is meant well, I just hope it's not used as a way to quietly discriminate along each branch separately depending on biases.
posted by Annika Cicada at 12:02 PM on June 30, 2016 [2 favorites]


Do cis people on hormone therapies receive the same scrutiny? I really do not know and I'm asking sincerely.

There are a lot of medical conditions that can result in delays until stabilization, e.g.
Strabismus, surgery for the correction of, within the preceding 6 months.
posted by Etrigan at 12:03 PM on June 30, 2016 [2 favorites]


NPR ran a story this morning about the impending decision. It was interesting to hear Captain Peace [!!!] note that the Army had recently reversed its position that she should instruct soldiers to refer to her by male pronouns, as well as her optimism about servicemembers being able to serve openly -- that once the ban is lifted, it might actually be easier, in some senses, to identify as transgender in the military than in many civilian jobs.
posted by uncleozzy at 12:34 PM on June 30, 2016 [2 favorites]


The conservatives are not having a very good week, are they?
posted by TedW at 12:39 PM on June 30, 2016 [6 favorites]


This is a good thing. Embarrasingly long overdue, but a good thing nonetheless.

Only a first shuffling step, though; I don't envy the trans service members the mountain of narrow minded, stiff necked bullshit they're going to have to wade through while culture catches up to policy.

Crap, I've mixed like five metaphors up in there someplace. Hope the sentiment still comes through.
posted by Mooski at 12:53 PM on June 30, 2016


I don't envy the trans service members the mountain of narrow minded, stiff necked bullshit they're going to have to wade through while culture catches up to policy.


But they are already serving. More than 15,000 of them.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 12:59 PM on June 30, 2016 [4 favorites]


Trans twitter is really split on this. Lots of people decrying the military industrial complex. But as noted, they are already serving and we should make it easier for them. I don't think a lot of trans people are going to rush to join the military now that they're able to do so openly, and even if they did, it's not going to make a dent in the size of the armed forces.
posted by AFABulous at 1:07 PM on June 30, 2016 [1 favorite]


I kind of wonder whether this will end up lowering the number of trans service members -- as odinsdream points out, trans people are more likely to serve, and at least some of them (Kristin Beck, for instance) have said that they explicitly joined the military as a way to overcome their gender identity issues: "I feel like a woman, but the Army will make a real man out of me!"
posted by Etrigan at 1:11 PM on June 30, 2016


But they are already serving. More than 15,000 of them.

I don't disagree, though I think in many cases the fact that policy is with them will make things worse. I've dealt with a lot of people who deal in hate, and for them the only thing worse than the Other is being forced to sit at the table with them.
posted by Mooski at 1:11 PM on June 30, 2016 [1 favorite]


I wonder if people will join the military in order to have better access to trans medical care.
posted by Annika Cicada at 1:28 PM on June 30, 2016 [5 favorites]


I wonder if people will join the military in order to have better access to trans medical care.

People do it for much less (like paying for college) so… yeah, probably.
posted by indubitable at 1:38 PM on June 30, 2016 [2 favorites]


I don't disagree, though I think in many cases the fact that policy is with them will make things worse. I've dealt with a lot of people who deal in hate, and for them the only thing worse than the Other is being forced to sit at the table with them.

The US military's record on race anyway is... well, you couldn't say it's actually inspiring or hopeful, but maybe less-anti-inspiring and less-hope-destroying than most other large American institutions.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 1:53 PM on June 30, 2016 [3 favorites]


Trans twitter is really split on this. Lots of people decrying the military industrial complex.

The military is indeed a terrible institution but there's really no goals served by them continuing to discriminate and punish trans people. Even if you've got some kind of accelerationist beliefs, there's not really enough trans people for heightening that particular contradiction to have much effect. All the discriminatory policy was doing was making the lives of some trans people shittier.

Like, I get where they're coming from, but we can celebrate the end of a discriminatory policy without celebrating the military itself.
posted by vibratory manner of working at 4:31 PM on June 30, 2016 [4 favorites]


Trans people getting better treatment and acceptance shouldn't have to bear the burden of solving all the evils of colonization and patriarchy in the process. Like, my right to my existence on my terms owes neither the patriarchy nor the human rights activists or anyone's political agenda for that matter.
posted by Annika Cicada at 5:26 PM on June 30, 2016 [11 favorites]


Friendly reminder that trans people are twice as likely to serve in the military than cis people:
Transgender Americans are twice as likely as their cisgender (non-trans) peers to serve in the Armed Forces


In the US. There are a lot of trans people outside the US, and there is no research I am aware of to demonstrate a similar effect elsewhere, and given the cultural, economic, and social positioning of the military in the US is in many ways unlike in much of the rest of the world, there are good reasons to believe it may not hold for many other parts of the world.

Trans Americans are twice as likely to serve in the military as their cis counterparts. It is not at all clear that this is true of trans people.
posted by Dysk at 6:26 PM on June 30, 2016 [1 favorite]


So I asked my ex (who's Army, an O-5, a former ADA battalion commander, decorated war hero and MY FRIEND) and he said that a good soldier is a good soldier is a good soldier and his job was to keep good soldiers safe in his unit. He says it always depends on local commanders to follow policy.
posted by blessedlyndie at 7:06 PM on June 30, 2016 [2 favorites]


Very few people join the military because they want to wage war. They join for honor, duty, a good job, or because they want to serve their country. We can support and uplift these folks while also decrying the politicians and robber barons who benefit from war mongering.

This is a good thing and it makes me happy.
posted by Doleful Creature at 8:07 PM on June 30, 2016 [3 favorites]


Not unlike the repeal of the whole DADT; there is going to be a great deal of wonderful indifference to it. Service now has a Singh with a beard serving as a decorated officer; adding decorated and capable trans folk to the services is going to be another BFD to the vast majority.
posted by buzzman at 8:53 PM on June 30, 2016 [1 favorite]


Navy time line.
posted by buzzman at 9:32 PM on June 30, 2016 [1 favorite]


The issue of latrine/head usage; and of the shower facilities; is going to be a fine, yet very particular item as the military leads the advancement of trans rights. Many will be indifferent; but there will be a few that will be eradicative in a very biased matter about even discussing it. Showers, and bathrooms (civilian word for where people have bodily waste removal type activities); will be the real difficulties for those that have issues with others being unique.
posted by buzzman at 9:38 PM on July 3, 2016


« Older They know everything...   |   Airbnb in Disputes With New York and San Francisco Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments