Connect With Us

FacebookTwitterRSSYoutube
TOP STORIES:
Persecution or Prosecution In The Case of Kaitlyn Hunt?
Widow Of NH National Guard Soldier Details DOMA's Impact
Zach Sobiech has gone a little higher
"All Gays Left Behind" Immigration Bill Moves Forward

Just For Clarity- DADT Does Not Effect Transpeople and Intersexuals

More about Bridgette P. LaVictoire
Posted by: Bridgette P. LaVictoire on June 1, 2010.

06/01/10-by Bridgette P. LaVictoire
There have been some questions raised regarding whether or not the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell will cover transpeople. Given that one of the activists who chained themselves to the White House fence is a transwoman, it is a valid question. DADT does not cover transpeople in the least. Repealing DADT will not allow anyone who is transsexual to serve so long as they are already open about it, and they are in transition. The veterans who have transitioned did so after their service was over, not before.

The ban on transsexuals and interssexuals serving in the military is not because of DADT, but due largely on medical grounds. Genital reassignment surgery is considered a major medical procedure and anyone who has had to undergo major medical procedures is barred from entering service. Many of those veterans who have been severely wounded in combat, such as losing a limb, are often assigned stateside in order to allow others to go to the front. This is an old method of handling personnel shortages.

For transpeople, though not all intersexuals, the reliance upon hormones is another disqualifying factor. The synthetic hormones raise the risks of certain physical problems that could be exacerbated during combat or during strenuous training exercises. While this may be true, I can imagine that the ability to get the synthetic hormones on a battlefield or in a remote area during training could be extremely problematic.

Finally, and again for transpeople alone, the rationale behind transpeople not serving in the military is psychological. Because transsexuality is seen as being a major psychological issue, it is usually used to exclude people from the military.

Alright, all of this is wonderful, and makes some logical sense. It may not be the actual reasoning that the military used, but there it is.

Transsexuals and interssexuals are excluded from military service by regulation, and not by law. This means that the White House could, at any time, order the Pentagon to craft regulations to accommodate members of both groups within the service.

This is not a call to action or an attempt to get anything done on this issue. It is merely to let people know that, despite what people may be saying about DADT, it is not an issue that covers all within our community. Instead, it is an issue unique to lesbians and gays. The question now is, should there be a push for equal inclusion of transsexuals and intersexuals in the military, and would this be the right time to push it or would it be better to wait until the military is settled with regards to lesbians and gays? Under what circumstances should a transsexual or intersexual be allowed to join the military? While this is not a top priority issue, maybe it is time to start thinking about it.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Share This Post

13 Responses to Just For Clarity- DADT Does Not Effect Transpeople and Intersexuals

  1. kiersten woods

    December 22, 2010 at 7:19 am

    I am embarassed and ashamed of my last post…of which i failed to clarify that DADT is not having an effect on the transy ..its a moot point as they are ”mental defuncts and physically inept” to the entry control processes and with all that hormonal bipolar shit they go through..”thank god they aren’t given a license to freely kill or trained for that…and we didnt begin to cover the ”narcissism” and penultimate selfishness over their genitals they are..”can you imagine”..to have your genitalia be a focus?…too funny…enjoy yourselves…it is alot of fun….bye..

  2. kiersten woods

    December 22, 2010 at 6:59 am

    earlier comment…and with those as possible reasons…the ”t” in glbt should be excluded from DADT…as the other comments do suffice with the trans never getting into the military in the first place and they do get their re ”assignments”lol..after their service….and good for them..”thankyou”…giggles…and if there are any ”noticeable spelling or grammatical errors..please embarrass me and or humiliate me in this forum as best as you can….thanks..kw

  3. kiersten woods

    December 22, 2010 at 6:27 am

    transpeople are flat out mental cases….when ‘one’ starts off in life disliking themselves ..as trans people do unless they grew up in some other world where there are no ”differences”..lol…the trans person will be inundated with silicone ,hormones,constant insecurity…and moreso for the f to m as that ”addadiktome”..operation is not one to feel ‘secure’ about unless ur really warped…and social issues for the mtf render them into another ”alternate lifestyle”..ie..shut ins…codependent to ”the forever trans meetings”and online ”avatar lives”…umm…chuck them into ”OUTOFITSEXCHANGE LANDIA”….giggles…its true…soo true…..and or the ultimate self delUsion…believing ur ”passing”..when in reality..you will never know ”privacy” again..u wear ur ”pervert sign” everywhere u go”….”get ur freekshow on”…go have a good time..its amusing….

    • Bridgette P. LaVictoire

      December 22, 2010 at 7:42 am

      What a vile little transphobe. Incidentally, I’ve met many a transwoman who are perfectly sane. As for me, I have other issues not related to being born intersexed.

  4. Meghan Stabler

    June 3, 2010 at 2:01 am

    It is not specifically a “trans ban” as this falls under medical and conduct regs under the Uniform Military Code.

    The military regulations that directly apply to transgender individuals break down into two basic categories: 1) medical regulations, and 2) conduct regulations.

    How these regulations may impact transgender individuals depends on what their service status is with the military.

    I’ll list three scenarios.

    Entering the Military – Transgender individuals are prohibited from entering military service by medical regulations. To join the military, potential service members are required to undergo a physical examination as part of the entry process. During this examination, the military may reject the potential service member if he or she has had any type of genital surgery. Furthermore, even if the potential service member has not had surgery but identifies as transgender, the military considers this to be a mental health condition which disqualifies them from entering military service.

    Active Duty Military – Transgender individuals who are already in the military and who are thinking about beginning their transition should think twice about this decision. The military currently has a strong bias against service by transgender individuals and is unlikely to provide the medical support necessary for transitioning service members. The medical and mental health regulations described above apply to currently serving individuals, so even if transgender service members seek treatment from civilian health care providers, they are at risk because they have a duty to report such treatment to the military. Failure to abide by these regulations could result in criminal prosecution by the military.

    Also, the military strictly regulates uniform and grooming standards by gender. “Cross-dressing” or perceived “cross-dressing,” even in the context of following medical protocol in advance of full transition, will probably be considered a violation of military regulations and result in discipline, discharge or criminal prosecution.

    Individual Ready Reserve Military – Transgender persons recalled to duty from the inactive reserve may need to consider halting their transition process while they complete their active duty requirement because of the regulations discussed above. Otherwise, transitioning or post-transitioning reservists may be medically disqualified for continued service once they are recalled to duty and receive physical examinations.

    I hope this adds a little more clarity to the situation in the USA. Other international military organizations have a much different take so long as the service member is a post-operative transsexual.

    • Bridgette P. LaVictoire

      June 3, 2010 at 8:13 am

      Thank you. I had difficulty getting all of the information, but I wanted to let people know since there were questions being raised and some people believed ending DADT would allow transpeople to join into the military openly.

  5. xrk9854

    June 2, 2010 at 12:32 am

    All the arguments the military uses are BULL$HIT. Transsexual people serve in other countries. No this is just another indicator of how far behind the USA is in terms of human rights.

    • Bridgette P. LaVictoire

      June 2, 2010 at 7:01 am

      Xrk9854-

      I agree. All I wanted to do was explain what was going on here. I think that transpeople and intersexuals should serve in the military.

  6. Pingback: Tweets that mention Just For Clarity- DADT Does Not Effect Transpeople and Intersexuals - Lez Get Real -- Topsy.com

  7. S

    June 1, 2010 at 2:00 pm

    “affect” *grumble*

    • Bridgette P. LaVictoire

      June 1, 2010 at 2:16 pm

      S,

      Effect is correct. Affect is subtly different. In this care, it is Effect, as in DADT does not have an effect on transpeople.

      If I am incorrect, please do not just give me a change and then grumble about it. I am dysgraphic and slightly dyslexic. That means I have a lot of trouble with accuracy in the English language. While my abilities with the language have gotten better, that does not mean that I am able to catch every spelling or grammatical mistake I make, and if it is something like the difference between effect and affect, then i may miss it entirely. It is not laziness on my part. This is a legitimate learning disability which does create problems for me with regards to the English language.

    • S

      June 1, 2010 at 3:12 pm

      “to effect” means “to cause”:
      http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/effect

      “to affect” means “to influence”:
      http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/affect

      You can either say “DADT does not have an effect on [whatever]“, but in that case you use it as a noun. If you want to use a verb there, it’s “affect”.

      I didn’t mean to say your’s lazy or anything. People make this mistake all the time :)
      The problem is that both words are nouns as well as verbs, with different meanings in each case

    • Bridgette P. LaVictoire

      June 1, 2010 at 3:30 pm

      And, S, in this case, it is up in the air. I looked up both definitions, and it’s an impossible call. I even asked someone else for clarification on this, and she said ‘effect’ rather than ‘affect’ since ‘affect’ is suppose to be about emotions. It is one of those really horrible places where the English language is really badly done.