The Original Gay Porn Community - Free Gay Movies and Photos, Gay Porn Site Reviews and Adult Gay Forums

  • Welcome To Just Us Boys - The World's Largest Gay Message Board Community

    In order to comply with recent US Supreme Court rulings regarding adult content, we will be making changes in the future to require that you log into your account to view adult content on the site.
    If you do not have an account, please register.
    REGISTER HERE - 100% FREE / We Will Never Sell Your Info

    To register, turn off your VPN; you can re-enable the VPN after registration. You must maintain an active email address on your account: disposable email addresses cannot be used to register.

Trump: Transgender persons will not be allowed to serve in the military

Re: Trump Bans Transgendered from Serving in the Military

Neither Obama nor Clinton served. Clinton evaded the draft and was a fugitive felon until Carter pardoned him. http://www.snopes.com/politics/clintons/felon.asp
He avoided the draft by telling the draft board that he had joined the reserves, when he had not committed himself. Then he got a lower draft number so he welched on his enlistment.
It is gross hypocrisy for democrats to wink at Clinton's avoidance while blaming Trump for legal deferments.
 
kallipolis said:
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news...t-accept-or-allow-transgender-people-to-serve

The military general staff will have the last word on this matter for there is within the US armed forces a shortage of specialists in all areas that may well be suitable for transgender people. Other nations such as their cousins in the United Kingdom have no issue employing transgender persons in their armed forces.

I quote:



and
Click to expand...

I cannot imagine why you think it is a proper function of the US military to enlist transgenders and pay for their transitions.
 
eastofeden said:
Worth Repeating...

Frightening really how many people didn't get it.....
Click to expand...

Exactly! Almost half of us really didn't get it. I'm in the pool of fools who gave him the benefit of a doubt. It is truly Frightening. That Pence may replace him is also Frightening. It is impossible not to feel doomed.
 
Re: Trump Bans Transgendered from Serving in the Military

gsdx said:
Don't forget that he announced that McCain wasn't a hero because he was captured, yet proudly wore someone else's purple heart.
Click to expand...

He publicly insulted a Gold Star Family. He is disgraceful.
 
Just yesterday I was saying that the Republicans are gonna use any help the Dems give them as a weapon and that John McCain KNOWS that.....and that the Dems should abandon the LGBT community anyway for the greater good since the "progressive" LGBT people want their heads on a platter and pledge to do everything they can to get rid of them anyway....

...and now today....

http://www.thenewcivilrightsmovemen...elt_states_to_defend_opposition_to_new_policy

In fact, the White House makes clear this is totally a political decision.

"This forces Democrats in rust belt states like Ohio, Michigan, and Wisconsin, to take complete ownership of this issues," a Trump administration official told Axios' Jonathan Swan. "How will blue collar voters in these states respond when senators up for reelection in 2018 like Debbie Stabenow are forced to make their opposition to this a key plank of their campaigns?"

Senator Debbie Stabenow is a popular three-term Democrat from Wisconsin who is running for re-election in 2018.
Click to expand...
 
I fully support Trump's decision.

The social structure of the military is NOT supposed to be a duplicate of civilian society. It's there for a singular purpose, and that is to be an effective fighting unit. Turning those units into a social engineering experiment is NOT helping their primary function, which is to effectively wage war on our enemies, and that naturally MUST be a military's first and foremost objective.

Having the Pentagon and the military command structure waste money, resources and time on special transgender policies such as 'cohesion' and 'inclusivity' and 'awareness' and whatever else is not what the armed forces are there to do. By using social wedge issues to continually erode the effective functioning capability of troops to do their jobs, you could potentially be putting lives at risk. That is surely why the military recommended this decision, and I respect it.

I'm sick of the left's perpetual groupthink, paranoia, and narrow-mindedness around sexual/gender issues. And once again, I'm sick of the almost authoritarian collective 'LGBT' mindset that apparently demands that the only function we all have is to use our sexual identity to wage endless social war on all facets of mainstream society.
 
ChickenGuy said:
I fully support Trump's decision.

I'm sick of the left's perpetual groupthink, paranoia, and narrow-mindedness around sexual/gender issues. And once again, I'm sick of the almost authoritarian collective 'LGBT' mindset that apparently demands that the only function we all have is to use our sexual identity to wage endless social war on all facets of mainstream society.
Click to expand...

The irony of this statement is that this is apparently the "lefts" problems.
 
^^The United Kingdom's armed forces have no problem living with transgender personnel:

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/britains-first-transgender-raf-pilot-4874086

I quote:

The UK's first transgender military pilot has spoken out - to praise her colleagues for their "exemplary" attitude towards her transformation.Ayla Holdom, 34, is a search-and-rescue pilot and a decorated RAF officer, who changed from a man to a woman.Over a two-year period, she underwent three major operations and several other procedures to achieve a body she felt comfortable with.Now the transformation is complete, she has come forward to praise the RAF and her co-workers for their "complete acceptance and empathy".
Click to expand...
 
Benvolio said:
I cannot imagine why you think it is a proper function of the US military to enlist transgenders and pay for their transitions.
Click to expand...

I am certain that had a serving soldier, sailor, or airman problems with their genitalia, the appropriate response of the military's medical personnel would be to fix that which needs fixing. Why should assisting a soldier, sailor, or airman in transition be any different?
 
ChickenGuy said:
I'm sick of the left's perpetual groupthink, paranoia, and narrow-mindedness around sexual/gender issues. And once again, I'm sick of the almost authoritarian collective 'LGBT' mindset that apparently demands that the only function we all have is to use our sexual identity to wage endless social war on all facets of mainstream society.
Click to expand...

Gay Alexander the Great had no problem with his army conquering much of the middle east into India.

The first world war UK poet, Siegfriend Sassoon was gay, and winner of the military cross. Should one eliminate gay men, and women, along with transgender personnel because their image does not fit in with your ideas?

I do not forget the great British first world war hero, T. E. Lawrence with his well established gay credentials, leading Arab armies to inflict heavy defeats on the army of the Ottoman Empire.

I do not neglect gay Louis Mountbatten, former supreme allied commander for South East Asia, and last viceroy of India who loved the navy sufficiently to want to know as many young naval officers as he could lay his hands on.
 
kallipolis said:
I am certain that had a serving soldier, sailor, or airman problems with their genitalia, the appropriate response of the military's medical personnel would be to fix that which needs fixing. Why should assisting a soldier, sailor, or airman in transition be any different?
Click to expand...

They should not enlist any person with major medical or psychological problems or who will have assimilation problems or requiring additional accommodations. I do not believe women and men should serve in mixed units; rape is just the most obvious problem.
 
kallipolis said:
Gay Alexander the Great had no problem with his army conquering much of the middle east into India.

The first world war UK poet, Siegfriend Sassoon was gay, and winner of the military cross. Should one eliminate gay men, and women, along with transgender personnel because their image does not fit in with your ideas?

I do not forget the great British first world war hero, T. E. Lawrence with his well established gay credentials, leading Arab armies to inflict heavy defeats on the army of the Ottoman Empire.

I do not neglect gay Louis Mountbatten, former supreme allied commander for South East Asia, and last viceroy of India who loved the navy sufficiently to want to know as many young naval officers as he could lay his hands on.
Click to expand...

We were not talking about gays. There have always been gays and transsexuals in the military. Most have and still do keep their sexual identity secret, including your examples. That has not bee a major problem. Only recently have some, probably few, wanted to be open.
 
ChickenGuy said:
I fully support Trump's decision.

The social structure of the military is NOT supposed to be a duplicate of civilian society. It's there for a singular purpose, and that is to be an effective fighting unit. Turning those units into a social engineering experiment is NOT helping their primary function, which is to effectively wage war on our enemies, and that naturally MUST be a military's first and foremost objective.
Click to expand...

No, actually. The military's first job is to avoid war, usually by a combination of imagery and social/political rumor. Its first defense and offense is its existence, not its lively, toe-steppin' actions. Its second job is to get the goal completed with the minimum amount of loss of life as possible - and none of that involves you eyeballing anyone's trouser department past the medical physical.

(and that particular .2 seconds was a joke in itself. I actually felt sorry for the guy, some had -to-be-70-if-he-was-a-day doing the quickest "Sure I glanced' that I've ver seen in my life while the woman in the back was trying to mime 'modesty!' motions about covering tits with a slipping sheet.)

Tell you what, when you have military experience (and I know you do not, not with what drivel you've posted here about 'what the military is really for!' - and yes, while I do have a bit, though not nearly as much as I signed up for all those years ago, ah, sixteen! The irritations of youth and the utter refusal to admit defeat) then you can preach about what the military's goal is and how to adequately go about it.

In other words, unless your ass has willingly signed up yourself then I doubt anyone or their dog wants to hear it.

*And for the nosy, mine was a medical discharge.
 
*Regarding the genital check for the military, apparently they do a similar job when immigrating, was talking with one woman several years back who had the exact same slip-eyed half-second flashing-at-the-beach 'we gotta say we did it for paperwork' apology. If they're gonna be quite a bit less than thorough with that bit (and oh my yes, they were certainly less than thorough), might as well take it off the charts.
 
luckynumbah7 said:
No, actually. The military's first job is to avoid war, usually by a combination of imagery and social/political rumor. Its first defense and offense is its existence, not its lively, toe-steppin' actions. Its second job is to get the goal completed with the minimum amount of loss of life as possible - and none of that involves you eyeballing anyone's trouser department past the medical physical.

Tell you what, when you have military experience (and I know you do not, not with what drivel you've posted here about 'what the military is really for!' - and yes, while I do have a bit, though not nearly as much as I signed up for all those years ago, ah, sixteen! The irritations of youth and the utter refusal to admit defeat) then you can preach about what the military's goal is and how to adequately go about it.

In other words, unless your ass has willingly signed up yourself then I doubt anyone or their dog wants to hear it.

*And for the nosy, mine was a medical discharge.
Click to expand...
I don't think an army of mixed transsexuals in transition is going to be effective in fighting or on deterring war. And yes, I was an officer. Your little bit ending in medical discharge hardly qualifies you as a expert.
 
Benvolio said:
I don't think
Click to expand...

That about sums up your cogitation right there, yes. You didn't need to waste all those extraneous vowels, no sir.

Now, there's a couple ways we could dance. I could point out that no one fights harder than someone who's been accepted as part of the group and you could 'Cry foul' while I point to various bits of past history, both old and rather recent (though other people have already included such examples) or I could point out there's no such thing as 'mixed transexuals in transition' (because there's no beginning and end of transition if you ask most cissexual people; once tarred, always tarred, medical and/or social involvement or none whatsoever - all of which puberty-inducing & social growing affects the average sixteen year old as well, who are also allowed to sign up (with their parents permission!, though funnily enough not both parents - odd, that) or (and this is a fun one)

I could ask exactly what your experiences are in the subject, hell, let's ask about both subjects, trans and the military, because I suspect they're a big 'ole round number.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top