- Boards
- Current Events
- Military the newest victim of transgender political correctness
The force-wide presentation sheds quite a bit of light on the implications of the rule change on transgender service members. The policy prioritizes subjective feelings over combat-readiness and inverts military order by placing the needs of individuals over the well-being of their units. Read the whole thing: http://thefederalist.com/2017/07/05/new-army-training-tells-female-soldiers-put-naked-men-showers/
KhanofKhans, KhanJohnson, Saloonist, Basileos
|
As important as privacy and respect are, the biggest problem with the policy is its effect on the military’s core purpose of battle readiness. For example, under the policy, a male infantryman who cannot meet the bare minimum requirement of 42 pushups and is therefore considered a liability in combat can switch his “gender marker” to female and suddenly be qualified. Even though he retains the exact same physical characteristics, and can do only 19 push-ups, he will now be a combat-ready female infantry soldier, eligible to hold the exact same role in his former unit.
KhanofKhans, KhanJohnson, Saloonist, Basileos
|
|
Haven't had this briefing yet. I'm sure it's coming.
|
|
I think if they're going to be fighting and dying for the country, we could at least respect their wishes in regards to their gender.
|
|
Flasbangs posted...
Why is it only on the internet you ever hear about this stupid gender s***? It's like it doesn't exist in real life. A very vocal minority with a platform, the internet, that allows them to be heard.
Oda break tracker 2017- 5 (2)
Super Mario Maker Profile: 1237-0000-0073-02FE |
|
LightHawKnight posted...
Wait, 42 pushups is combat ready? And females only need 19? What even are those numbers?! My old female Sergeant from my conscription was denied a tour in Afghanistan because no squad really trusts females that takes the easy way. It's not about sexism, it's about trusting the soldier by your side being able to drag you out of a s***ty situation if it's needed.
"That's the metaphorical equivalent of flopping your wedding tackle into a lion's mouth and flicking his love spuds with a wet towel" - Arnold Rimmer
|
For a soldier to officially change gender requires only some paperwork. A military doctor or civilian medical professional must certify that the transgender person has achieved “stability in the preferred gender” and the soldier must change the gender designation on the soldier’s passport or birth certificate. From that point on, the transgender soldier is “expected to adhere to all military standards associated with their gender,” and “use the billeting, bathroom and shower facilities” of their new gender. So... almost no one is going to take advantage of this and the boogeyman dies, while the <1% of men who are indeed trans will begin presenting themselves as women in every moment of waking life (or females as dudes). ~ The only umbrage is that a female has different physical requirements to be considered combat ready, but that's an auxiliary issue that shouldn't be conflated with this one.
Remember that I won't rest, 'til we share the same tense
Just know, to me, you're better late than never again. |
|
Flasbangs posted...
LightHawKnight posted...Wait, 42 pushups is combat ready? And females only need 19? What even are those numbers?! What does that have to do with those arbitrary numbers? Hell, a fit adult male should be able to do more than 42 pushups as well...
The Official Odin of the Shin Megami Tensei IV board.
"You know how confusing the whole good-evil concept is for me." |
|
LightHawKnight posted...
Wait, 42 pushups is combat ready? And females only need 19? What even are those numbers?! Those are the minimum for 18 year old male and female Soldiers. The difference is a source of contention especially when the minimum for males is the max for females.
PSN: obsurdrandom
|
|
philsov posted...
The only umbrage is that a female has different physical requirements to be considered combat ready. A "combat ready woman" in the military will still see far less combat than the average man as they'll be assigned different positions / roles. Anyway, despite this, a lot of women in the military strive to meet the requirements that men are held to. Most do far more than the minimum, and a few can meet the standard required for men. |
|
LightHawKnight posted...
Flasbangs posted...LightHawKnight posted...Wait, 42 pushups is combat ready? And females only need 19? What even are those numbers?! Those arbitrary numbers really just represent the differences there is between males and females in the army. I'm pretty sure that anyone who has been a soldier for more than 4 months can do hundreds of pushups.
"That's the metaphorical equivalent of flopping your wedding tackle into a lion's mouth and flicking his love spuds with a wet towel" - Arnold Rimmer
|
|
Flasbangs posted...
LightHawKnight posted...Flasbangs posted...LightHawKnight posted...Wait, 42 pushups is combat ready? And females only need 19? What even are those numbers?! Those numbers are within a 2 minute time limit without resting. Proper pushups. Nobody it doing "Hundreds" within that time limit.
PSN: obsurdrandom
|
|
Melonfarms posted...
Flasbangs posted...LightHawKnight posted...Flasbangs posted...LightHawKnight posted...Wait, 42 pushups is combat ready? And females only need 19? What even are those numbers?! Ah, within 2 minutes, makes more sense, but that number for females still seems way to low.
The Official Odin of the Shin Megami Tensei IV board.
"You know how confusing the whole good-evil concept is for me." |
|
LightHawKnight posted...
Melonfarms posted...Flasbangs posted...LightHawKnight posted...Flasbangs posted...LightHawKnight posted...Wait, 42 pushups is combat ready? And females only need 19? What even are those numbers?! Females and males are physically and psychologically different. This may shock some people.
KhanofKhans, KhanJohnson, Saloonist, Basileos
|
|
LightHawKnight posted...
Wait, 42 pushups is combat ready? And females only need 19? What even are those numbers?! Pushups are only a part of a composite score that also includes a 2 mile run and sit-ups as well. The final combined score must be above a certain mark to be considered combat-ready. So if you can only manage to do the minimum of 42 pushups, then you better do extremely well on the other two tests in order to pass.
Hmm...
|
|
Callixtus posted...
but the demands of the military on an individual soldier are not IMO, if the female standard is sufficient to operate as a successful member of a unit and further fitness offers no improvement to unit success or casualty rates, the male standard should be reduced and more time made available to male soldiers to pursue other activities that would enhance success rates, such as marksmanship.
And when the hourglass has run out, eternity asks you about only one thing: whether you have lived in despair or not.
|
|
Callixtus posted...
LightHawKnight posted...Melonfarms posted...Flasbangs posted...LightHawKnight posted...Flasbangs posted...LightHawKnight posted...Wait, 42 pushups is combat ready? And females only need 19? What even are those numbers?! Different yes, but not to the point where 19 and 42 are the differences for pushups.
The Official Odin of the Shin Megami Tensei IV board.
"You know how confusing the whole good-evil concept is for me." |
|
Darkman124 posted...
Callixtus posted... I think the reasoning is that they give men the more physically demanding jobs because they have stronger builds. |
|
Paragon21XX posted...
LightHawKnight posted...Wait, 42 pushups is combat ready? And females only need 19? What even are those numbers?! You only need the minimum in all three categories. You don't need to do extremely well in the other 2 if you only make the minimum in 1. There are tons of Soldiers who pass with the minimum. Often Soldiers will stop at the minimum on an event they are strong in to save their strength for an event they are bad in. Most Soldiers don't have trouble with fitness but for the ones that do it sucks.
PSN: obsurdrandom
|
|
OpheliaAdenade posted...
I think the reasoning is that they give men the more physically demanding jobs because they have stronger builds. then we should define physical standards by soldier role and not by gender i think the physical standards as a whole are rather hastily constructed out of a vague sense that a soldier should be "physically fit" on a qualitative level rather than a quantitative, statistically valid evaluation
And when the hourglass has run out, eternity asks you about only one thing: whether you have lived in despair or not.
|
|
Darkman124 posted...
OpheliaAdenade posted...I think the reasoning is that they give men the more physically demanding jobs because they have stronger builds. That stuff probably changes all the time though. I'm not an expert on the military, but I imagine your role can be changed based on current needs. So they test people in such a way to make sure they could perform adequately in any role they could possibly be assigned. |
|
Darkman124 posted...
OpheliaAdenade posted...I think the reasoning is that they give men the more physically demanding jobs because they have stronger builds. That makes too much sense for the military. The justification is the idea of one standard because everyone should be able to fight regardless of their occupation within the military.
PSN: obsurdrandom
|
|
It's a dated system, yes. There has even been a push by higher ups to test based on your actual job requirements. I have a feeling g that this is an effort to help recruit the stereotypical nerds that are good with computer systems, since cyber warfare is the newest battlefront.
That being said, each military member needs to have a warrior mentality, an understanding that ensuring our way of life demands a level of professionalism in contributing to the way that we wage wars. If you look like a fat piece of s*** in your uniform, you aren't taking the mission, or the lives of those you have sworn to protect seriously. |
As important as privacy and respect are, the biggest problem with the policy is its effect on the military’s core purpose of battle readiness. For example, under the policy, a male infantryman who cannot meet the bare minimum requirement of 42 pushups and is therefore considered a liability in combat can switch his “gender marker” to female and suddenly be qualified. Even though he retains the exact same physical characteristics, and can do only 19 push-ups, he will now be a combat-ready female infantry soldier, eligible to hold the exact same role in his former unit. I guess I'm supposed to believe that this is an easy way to work the system, except... A military doctor or civilian medical professional must certify that the transgender person has achieved “stability in the preferred gender” and the soldier must change the gender designation on the soldier’s passport or birth certificate. ...it's not like you can just do it on a whim |
|
How do they define "stability within gender"? What stops a random pervert from changing his gender so he can shower and bunk with women?
|
|
I believe the stability line is referring to mental stability and their ability to truly live the life of their preferred gender. This should help with the situation of being female for a day because trainee Smith is just too f***in fine.
|
|
PoopPotato posted...
I believe the stability line is referring to mental stability and their ability to truly live the life of their preferred gender. This should help with the situation of being female for a day because trainee Smith is just too f***in fine. Progressives have made clear there is no such thing as "truly living the life of a preferred gender". According to progressives the genders don't have any distinctions because distinctions are completely socially conditioned. Therefore liking dolls and makeup is not typically feminine and liking contact sports or weightlifting is not typically masculine. The only the distinction between man and woman is a subjective evaluation that has no characteristics of its own.
KhanofKhans, KhanJohnson, Saloonist, Basileos
|
|
Melonfarms posted...
There will always be people who take advantage of a system but I don't see this as a huge thing. Could be really helpful for someone who is needs to transition and cant afford health care. So the taxpayer should have to bear the burden?
KhanofKhans, KhanJohnson, Saloonist, Basileos
|
|
Damien747 posted...
How do they define "stability within gender"? What stops a random pervert from changing his gender so he can shower and bunk with women? Since it's all subjective, you just start identifying as a woman for X amount of time and then abra kadabra you are a woman.
KhanofKhans, KhanJohnson, Saloonist, Basileos
|
|
Callixtus posted...
Damien747 posted...How do they define "stability within gender"? What stops a random pervert from changing his gender so he can shower and bunk with women? You're just pulling that out of your ass, aren't you? You have no idea how the military doctors evaluate gender stability. |
|
Callixtus posted...
A military doctor or civilian medical professional must certify that the transgender person has achieved “stability in the preferred gender” fair next.
My sister's dog bit a hole in my Super Mario Land cartridge. It still works though - Skye Reynolds
3DS FC: 3239-5612-0115 |
|
Flasbangs posted...
Why is it only on the internet you ever hear about this stupid gender s***? It's like it doesn't exist in real life. LGBT people make up between 1 and 3 percent of the US population, according to studies. The majority of these people fall under the LGB aspect, so the number of trans people is absolutely sub 1% in the US. To go even further, trans people are not evenly distributed throughout the US (meaning that there are bound to be more trans people in, say, the Castro District rather than in rural Arkansas). So when you see articles like this, it's just people with an agenda (on either side) trying to either show how tolerant they are or how deplorable society (aka LIBERALS) is. Reality is that trans people are just a small group of people who want to live their lives like everyone else
A Green Butter Alt(TM)
http://i.imgur.com/LhwwG.gif |
|
OpheliaAdenade posted...
Callixtus posted...Damien747 posted...How do they define "stability within gender"? What stops a random pervert from changing his gender so he can shower and bunk with women? No, I don't know exactly how the evaluate it. But there are no "tests". It is literally all based on subjective experience.
KhanofKhans, KhanJohnson, Saloonist, Basileos
|
|
Romulox28 posted...
Flasbangs posted...Why is it only on the internet you ever hear about this stupid gender s***? It's like it doesn't exist in real life. A small group of people shouldn't be able to redefine how an entire society defines manhood and womanhood, but that is exactly what we have done. In the case of the military, this nonsense may end up reducing effectiveness and costing lives, just like the integration of women into the armed forces solely to please a political correctness-obsessed minority.
KhanofKhans, KhanJohnson, Saloonist, Basileos
|
|
Damien747 posted...
How do they define "stability within gender"? What stops a random pervert from changing his gender so he can shower and bunk with women? Well for starters, would-be rapists wouldn't have to go that far. The military has disgustingly frequent sexual assault, and everything possible is done to cover it up. So perverts have much easier ways to take advantage of women in the military with less consequence.
My sister's dog bit a hole in my Super Mario Land cartridge. It still works though - Skye Reynolds
3DS FC: 3239-5612-0115 |
|
Callixtus posted...
In the case of the military, this nonsense may end up reducing effectiveness and costing lives, just like the integration of women into the armed forces solely to please a political correctness-obsessed minority. It won't actually. They give men and women different jobs, a transwoman wouldn't be given a man's job.
My sister's dog bit a hole in my Super Mario Land cartridge. It still works though - Skye Reynolds
3DS FC: 3239-5612-0115 |
|
Callixtus posted...
Melonfarms posted...There will always be people who take advantage of a system but I don't see this as a huge thing. Could be really helpful for someone who is needs to transition and cant afford health care. You're already paying for Soldier healthcare. You paid for my eye surgery and so did I. I doubt the cost would be substantial and it would train doctors for future patients who can actually sue them if they mess up.
PSN: obsurdrandom
|
|
Callixtus posted...
No, I don't know exactly how the evaluate it. But there are no "tests". It is literally all based on subjective experience. Pretty much. You need to convince a qualified professional that you're transgender in earnest to the point of living as the opposite gender for the foreseeable future, including changing your gender on all legal documentation. Which is way more effort than Johnny "can't do pushups and wants to shower with girls" Doughboy will ever do.
Remember that I won't rest, 'til we share the same tense
Just know, to me, you're better late than never again. |
|
Callixtus posted...
A small group of people shouldn't be able to redefine how an entire society defines manhood and womanhood, but that is exactly what we have done. In the case of the military, this nonsense may end up reducing effectiveness and costing lives, just like the integration of women into the armed forces solely to please a political correctness-obsessed minority. You honestly don't think letting women serve is a good thing? My goodness, you're a nutcake. |
- Boards
- Current Events
- Military the newest victim of transgender political correctness
- Boards
- Current Events
- Military the newest victim of transgender political correctness
L0Z posted...It is caused by a misshapen or irregular hypothalamus. Stop trying to use the military as a social experiment. Tax payers should not pay for these people with misshapen hypothalamuses to have gender changes
We use tax payer dollars to fix other sorts of problems...L0Z posted...Well the problem is in a small part of the brain not the body. The body did nothing wrong
The brain is a part of your body... the brain is a bodily organ...We had a class on this month ago already. Nobody cared except one black dude who didn't know there was a difference between sex and gender and I had to explain to him lol
There was a couple females that didn't like that the army would pay for gender reassignment therapy because they didn't think it was fair the army doesn't pay for elective surgeries they would want.Steve Nash | 13| Phoenix Suns | PPG: 16.9 | RPG: 3.60 | APG 11.3 | EFF: +22.96
http://www.gifsoup.com/view3/2283379/dance-o.gifL0Z posted...from websters
Definition of body
plural
bodies
1
a
:
the main part of a plant or animal body especially as distinguished from limbs and head
:
I don't know what you're trying to say here. The brain is an organ in your body.OpheliaAdenade posted...Callixtus posted...
A small group of people shouldn't be able to redefine how an entire society defines manhood and womanhood, but that is exactly what we have done. In the case of the military, this nonsense may end up reducing effectiveness and costing lives, just like the integration of women into the armed forces solely to please a political correctness-obsessed minority.
You honestly don't think letting women serve is a good thing? My goodness, you're a nutcake.
No, not in combat roles.
There are plenty of people that agree on that part.
https://warontherocks.com/2014/11/heres-why-women-in-combat-units-is-a-bad-idea/
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/420826/women-in-combat-military-effectiveness-deadly-pentagon
http://www.businessinsider.com/unintended-consequences-of-women-in-combat-2016-1
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/mar/19/problems-women-combat-cant-be-mitigated-report/
https://www.mca-marines.org/gazette/blog/2012/07/05/get-over-it-we-are-not-all-created-equalKhanofKhans, KhanJohnson, Saloonist, BasileosHow much of actual combat relies on brute strength anyway? We're not over there boxing the enemy. I'd think that as long as you can carry your gear it doesn't matter how many pushups you can do.people here are really underestimating how weak women's arms are. I know a powerlifter girl that can squat like 300+ and deadlift 400 but can only bench 180. Even I can do more than that on bench.
most 20-30 year old women probably can't even do more than 6-7 pushups right now. Even an out of shape dude could probably get 20 easily.eston posted...How much of actual combat relies on brute strength anyway? We're not over there boxing the enemy. I'd think that as long as you can carry your gear it doesn't matter how many pushups you can do.
A lot actually? You know how hard it is to carry or drag a teammate? Its brutal. And carrying your gear can be a lot of the problem. It's hard enough for guys to carry a SAW for hours and days at a time with hundreds of rounds with drums. Full Kevlar and everything.
Every unit I have ever been with never assigns a SAW to a womanCubs, Rockies, A's, Grizzlies, Bulls, Cowboys, Patriots.eston posted...How much of actual combat relies on brute strength anyway? We're not over there boxing the enemy. I'd think that as long as you can carry your gear it doesn't matter how many pushups you can do.
It's about endurance. Being able to move from place to place quickly and carry a large pack with the possibility of carrying wounded.
Most combat is over quickly but you could be actively fighting for hours in extreme circumstances.
That is the current way anyway. IED followed by ambush followed by direct fire followed by the attackers running away when fire is returned.
Every circumstance is different.
Also ground patrols. Marching for a long time with tons of gear.PSN: obsurdrandomCallixtus posted...OpheliaAdenade posted...
Callixtus posted...
A small group of people shouldn't be able to redefine how an entire society defines manhood and womanhood, but that is exactly what we have done. In the case of the military, this nonsense may end up reducing effectiveness and costing lives, just like the integration of women into the armed forces solely to please a political correctness-obsessed minority.
You honestly don't think letting women serve is a good thing? My goodness, you're a nutcake.
No, not in combat roles.
There are plenty of people that agree on that part.
https://warontherocks.com/2014/11/heres-why-women-in-combat-units-is-a-bad-idea/
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/420826/women-in-combat-military-effectiveness-deadly-pentagon
http://www.businessinsider.com/unintended-consequences-of-women-in-combat-2016-1
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/mar/19/problems-women-combat-cant-be-mitigated-report/
https://www.mca-marines.org/gazette/blog/2012/07/05/get-over-it-we-are-not-all-created-equal
There are different things that women could excel at in the army though. Of course women aren't going to be ideal for frontline infantry.Another example there's a recent article that I read this week. The first women passed ranger school. They were given a 2 week prep course not available to men. They were also given extra time and chances to complete courses and able to study.
As a man I would be given obstacle A then 2 minutes later go start it. The women would get a week of training. If I fail I'm done with ranger school. If a woman failed they were allowed retries and eventually a recycle to an earlier week.
I'm all for women in any role as long it's equal. Wtf kinda bulls*** is that. You aren't gonna get prep time or chances on someone's lifeCubs, Rockies, A's, Grizzlies, Bulls, Cowboys, Patriots.darkprince45 posted...Another example there's a recent article that I read this week. The first women passed ranger school. They were given a 2 week prep course not available to men. They were also given extra time and chances to complete courses and able to study.
As a man I would be given obstacle A then 2 minutes later go start it. The women would get a week of training. If I fail I'm done with ranger school. If a woman failed they were allowed retries and eventually a recycle to an earlier week.
I'm all for women in any role as long it's equal. Wtf kinda bulls*** is that. You aren't gonna get prep time or chances on someone's life
How many Rangers does it take to change a light bulb?
10. 1 to change the bulb and 9 to tell you how hard Ranger school is.
Sounds like they wanted an article and to look progressive. Ranger school is no joke.PSN: obsurdrandomOpheliaAdenade posted...Callixtus posted...
OpheliaAdenade posted...
Callixtus posted...
A small group of people shouldn't be able to redefine how an entire society defines manhood and womanhood, but that is exactly what we have done. In the case of the military, this nonsense may end up reducing effectiveness and costing lives, just like the integration of women into the armed forces solely to please a political correctness-obsessed minority.
You honestly don't think letting women serve is a good thing? My goodness, you're a nutcake.
No, not in combat roles.
There are plenty of people that agree on that part.
https://warontherocks.com/2014/11/heres-why-women-in-combat-units-is-a-bad-idea/
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/420826/women-in-combat-military-effectiveness-deadly-pentagon
http://www.businessinsider.com/unintended-consequences-of-women-in-combat-2016-1
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/mar/19/problems-women-combat-cant-be-mitigated-report/
https://www.mca-marines.org/gazette/blog/2012/07/05/get-over-it-we-are-not-all-created-equal
There are different things that women could excel at in the army though. Of course women aren't going to be ideal for frontline infantry.
And yet vocal minorities have sought and attained exactly that.KhanofKhans, KhanJohnson, Saloonist, BasileosMelonfarms posted...darkprince45 posted...
Another example there's a recent article that I read this week. The first women passed ranger school. They were given a 2 week prep course not available to men. They were also given extra time and chances to complete courses and able to study.
As a man I would be given obstacle A then 2 minutes later go start it. The women would get a week of training. If I fail I'm done with ranger school. If a woman failed they were allowed retries and eventually a recycle to an earlier week.
I'm all for women in any role as long it's equal. Wtf kinda bulls*** is that. You aren't gonna get prep time or chances on someone's life
How many Rangers does it take to change a light bulb?
10. 1 to change the bulb and 9 to tell you how hard Ranger school is.
Sounds like they wanted an article and to look progressive. Ranger school is no joke.
I think basically admitted that. They weren't going to let at least 1 failCubs, Rockies, A's, Grizzlies, Bulls, Cowboys, Patriots.Callixtus posted...And yet vocal minorities have sought and attained exactly that.
Well, that was a mess up.
But I don't see how that has anything to do with transgender people in the military.OpheliaAdenade posted...Callixtus posted...
And yet vocal minorities have sought and attained exactly that.
Well, that was a mess up.
But I don't see how that has anything to do with transgender people in the military.
Well including women was just one of the first steps in the diminishing of standards in the military. Now we may very well have people with male anatomy, held to the already diminished standards of women. In addition, transpeople may very well cause all sorts of cohesion issues and lead to a rise in sexual assaults in an already sexual-assault plagued military.KhanofKhans, KhanJohnson, Saloonist, BasileosCallixtus posted...Well including women was just one of the first steps in the diminishing of standards in the military. Now we may very well have people with male anatomy, held to the already diminished standards of women. In addition, transpeople may very well cause all sorts of cohesion issues and lead to a rise in sexual assaults in an already sexual-assault plagued military.
Trans people make up like, less than 1 percent of the population. There aren't going to be very many that make it into the military to begin with.
And if they're held to the standards of the gender that they identity as, they're still going to end up physically where they belong. I think you're making a bigger deal out of this than you need to. The sky isn't falling.OpheliaAdenade posted...Callixtus posted...
Well including women was just one of the first steps in the diminishing of standards in the military. Now we may very well have people with male anatomy, held to the already diminished standards of women. In addition, transpeople may very well cause all sorts of cohesion issues and lead to a rise in sexual assaults in an already sexual-assault plagued military.
Trans people make up like, less than 1 percent of the population. There aren't going to be very many that make it into the military to begin with.
And if they're held to the standards of the gender that they identity as, they're still going to end up physically where they belong. I think you're making a bigger deal out of this than you need to. The sky isn't falling.
No one said the sky is falling. But how many lives are you willing to sacrifice in order to appease transfundamentalists? If even one person dies because we lowered standards for women, and males who identify as women, then that is already too many for me.KhanofKhans, KhanJohnson, Saloonist, BasileosCallixtus posted...No one said the sky is falling. But how many lives are you willing to sacrifice in order to appease transfundamentalists? If even one person dies because we lowered standards for women, and males who identify as women, then that is already too many for me.
They've never said anything about lowering standards for men or women though, have they? They're just going to be held to the standards of what they identify as.Callixtus posted...
For a soldier to officially change gender requires only some paperwork. A military doctor or civilian medical professional must certify that the transgender person has achieved “stability in the preferred gender” and the soldier must change the gender designation on the soldier’s passport or birth certificate. From that point on, the transgender soldier is “expected to adhere to all military standards associated with their gender,” and “use the billeting, bathroom and shower facilities” of their new gender.
Fair, next. But idiots will continue to believe their fantasy world where men apparently just say they are women and get a bunch of special treatment, including sexually abusing women in bathrooms with impunity.darkprince45 posted...Another example there's a recent article that I read this week. The first women passed ranger school. They were given a 2 week prep course not available to men. They were also given extra time and chances to complete courses and able to study.
As a man I would be given obstacle A then 2 minutes later go start it. The women would get a week of training. If I fail I'm done with ranger school. If a woman failed they were allowed retries and eventually a recycle to an earlier week.
I'm all for women in any role as long it's equal. Wtf kinda bulls*** is that. You aren't gonna get prep time or chances on someone's life
I want to say that the women that were the first to pass ranger school had a year to train. That is an entire year to focus on getting physically fit and study to make sure they could pass the Pre Ranger course standards.
Never heard of a male getting an entire year off to prep for ranger school. You want to go get tabbed you better prep on your own time.OpheliaAdenade posted...Callixtus posted...
No one said the sky is falling. But how many lives are you willing to sacrifice in order to appease transfundamentalists? If even one person dies because we lowered standards for women, and males who identify as women, then that is already too many for me.
They've never said anything about lowering standards for men or women though, have they? They're just going to be held to the standards of what they identify as.
The standards for women are already lowered. They don't have to meet the same strength qualifications as men. Not to mention the vast majority of physically fit women are physically inferior in a variety of metrics compared to the vast majority of physically fit men. So holding male anatomy soldiers to the physical standards of female anatomy soldiers in specific cases is in fact perpetuating and expanding what is already an irrational, and even dangerous, lowering of standards.
There is simply no need for females in combat units. We are a country of 300 million+ with some of the highest manpower reserves in the world. Yet, we are putting lives of both men and women in danger in pursuit of progressive social engineering, and doubling down on it by even allowing some male-bodied soldiers to meet standards below other male-bodied soldiers on the basis of nothing except that the soldiers claim they are a woman subjectively.KhanofKhans, KhanJohnson, Saloonist, Basileostennisdude818 posted...KiwiTerraRizing posted...
So this will be the excuse when Republicans get involved in another war they don't win?
Lol, has the anti-war left woken up from their 8 year long coma?
We've been wasting money and lives on Afghanistan for 16 years. Israel has been at endless war but for some reason Republicans feel all we need is a conservative in power to finally get them to give up.Ad Hominem.OpheliaAdenade posted...They've never said anything about lowering standards for men or women though, have they? They're just going to be held to the standards of what they identify as.
Which lies part of the problem. If a male wants to join, knowing full well female standards aren't as high, then he could eventually transition and then have a great PT score based on female standards. Why? Despite claiming to idenfity as a female, physically their body is still male. They will immediately benefit from a higher PT score because push ups and the 2 mile-run have much lower standards for females. Sit-ups are mostly on par with males. For example, a male scoring the bare minimum of 180 would end up being 238 for a female. That could be a difference of continuing to serve or being chaptered out for failure to meet PT standards.Fossil posted...OpheliaAdenade posted...
They've never said anything about lowering standards for men or women though, have they? They're just going to be held to the standards of what they identify as.
Which lies part of the problem. If a male wants to join, knowing full well female standards aren't as high, then he could eventually transition and then have a great PT score based on female standards. Why? Despite claiming to idenfity as a female, physically their body is still male. They will immediately benefit from a higher PT score because push ups and the 2 mile-run have much lower standards for females. Sit-ups are mostly on par with males. For example, a male scoring the bare minimum of 180 would end up being 238 for a female. That could be a difference of continuing to serve or being chaptered out for failure to meet PT standards.
I doubt someone wants to be in the army that badly. People always like to make up bulls*** strawmen when it comes to trangenders like middle schoolers having rampant sex in bathrooms.Ad Hominem.Webmaster4531 posted...I doubt someone wants to be in the army that badly.
wanna betFlasbangs posted...Why is it only on the internet you ever hear about this stupid gender s***? It's like it doesn't exist in real life.
Because in real life people go, "Okay" and move on. How does this effect the military's capabilities in one bit? It doesn't. How does it effect the average man on the street one bit? It doesn't. All it does it make it easier to recruit possible soldiers who are transgender, which is a net positive for both the military and the people who want to join but feel their gender might endanger it.
But no, the military is somehow a victim in all this, and it's some sort of ideological war that is a personal attack on anyone who is offended. Meanwhile, those same people won't shut up about how everyone they hate is just easily offended and how they bully people and how bullying builds character but not when it's directed at them, and all that hypocritical fun.OpheliaAdenade posted...I think if they're going to be fighting and dying for the country, we could at least respect their wishes in regards to their gender.
If you're going to join the military, your wishes go out the window.'It's okay that those gangbangers stole all my personal belongings and cash at gunpoint, cuz they're building a rec center!' - OneTimeBenDash_Harber posted...Flasbangs posted...
Why is it only on the internet you ever hear about this stupid gender s***? It's like it doesn't exist in real life.
Because in real life people go, "Okay" and move on. How does this effect the military's capabilities in one bit? It doesn't. How does it effect the average man on the street one bit? It doesn't. All it does it make it easier to recruit possible soldiers who are transgender, which is a net positive for both the military and the people who want to join but feel their gender might endanger it.
But no, the military is somehow a victim in all this, and it's some sort of ideological war that is a personal attack on anyone who is offended. Meanwhile, those same people won't shut up about how everyone they hate is just easily offended and how they bully people and how bullying builds character but not when it's directed at them, and all that hypocritical fun.
Actually it lowers the standards for certain male-anatomy recruits which may very well result in lives lost by entrenching lower standards. Furthermore, we can not underestimate the effects this could have on uniy cohesion and morale. Will it result in many more deaths? Probably not. But how many lives are you willing to trade in order to have male-bodied individuals subject to lowered female standards just to satisfy the gender brigade?KhanofKhans, KhanJohnson, Saloonist, BasileosCallixtus posted...Dash_Harber posted...
Flasbangs posted...
Why is it only on the internet you ever hear about this stupid gender s***? It's like it doesn't exist in real life.
Because in real life people go, "Okay" and move on. How does this effect the military's capabilities in one bit? It doesn't. How does it effect the average man on the street one bit? It doesn't. All it does it make it easier to recruit possible soldiers who are transgender, which is a net positive for both the military and the people who want to join but feel their gender might endanger it.
But no, the military is somehow a victim in all this, and it's some sort of ideological war that is a personal attack on anyone who is offended. Meanwhile, those same people won't shut up about how everyone they hate is just easily offended and how they bully people and how bullying builds character but not when it's directed at them, and all that hypocritical fun.
Actually it lowers the standards for certain male-anatomy recruits which may very well result in lives lost by entrenching lower standards. Furthermore, we can not underestimate the effects this could have on uniy cohesion and morale. Will it result in many more deaths? Probably not. But how many lives are you willing to trade in order to have male-bodied individuals subject to lowered female standards just to satisfy the gender brigade?
Which requirements, specifically? And how does that directly risk lives? And do you personally believe that people will randomly switch genders in order to pass tests they couldn't in the first place and take all the heat and problems that come with that?Dash_Harber posted...Callixtus posted...
Dash_Harber posted...
Flasbangs posted...
Why is it only on the internet you ever hear about this stupid gender s***? It's like it doesn't exist in real life.
Because in real life people go, "Okay" and move on. How does this effect the military's capabilities in one bit? It doesn't. How does it effect the average man on the street one bit? It doesn't. All it does it make it easier to recruit possible soldiers who are transgender, which is a net positive for both the military and the people who want to join but feel their gender might endanger it.
But no, the military is somehow a victim in all this, and it's some sort of ideological war that is a personal attack on anyone who is offended. Meanwhile, those same people won't shut up about how everyone they hate is just easily offended and how they bully people and how bullying builds character but not when it's directed at them, and all that hypocritical fun.
Actually it lowers the standards for certain male-anatomy recruits which may very well result in lives lost by entrenching lower standards. Furthermore, we can not underestimate the effects this could have on uniy cohesion and morale. Will it result in many more deaths? Probably not. But how many lives are you willing to trade in order to have male-bodied individuals subject to lowered female standards just to satisfy the gender brigade?
Which requirements, specifically? And how does that directly risk lives? And do you personally believe that people will randomly switch genders in order to pass tests they couldn't in the first place and take all the heat and problems that come with that?
Women do not have to meet the same physical requirements as men, which absolutely has real world effects. Women, for example, will struggle to carry equipment or wounded soldiers in intense situations, where a man would not struggle nearly as much. Now we'll have male bodied individuals who wont even be held to the same standards as every other male soldier. Yes, I do think that will result in less effective units and potentially more deaths. It doesn't matter if people will randomly switch genders. But yes I do think someone will. But the point is still that just as integrating women into combat positions is a terrible idea, this development is another terrible idea that lowers the quality of the armed forces in pursuit of social engineering.KhanofKhans, KhanJohnson, Saloonist, BasileosCallixtus posted...Women do not have to meet the same physical requirements as men, which absolutely has real worlx effects.
Do you have some specific examples?
Callixtus posted...But yes I do think someone will.
So, instead of punishing wrong doers, you think we should just punish everyone?
As far as women go, studies seem to be conflicting and simply saying "Women are weaker" is actually wrong since strength is defined in a number of important ways (but that is a bit off-topic);
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/jun/11/the-weaker-sex-science-that-shows-women-are-stronger-than-menI've already posted several links in this topic about how women's physical inferiority has negative combat implications. I'm not reposting them all.
I dont even have to read you link to know that its not disputing basic biological facts regarding men's superior strength and endurance, not to mention speed and tolerance for pain. This is common sense.KhanofKhans, KhanJohnson, Saloonist, BasileosFossil posted...Webmaster4531 posted...
I doubt someone wants to be in the army that badly.
wanna bet
I never got any proof of rampant sex in school bathrooms. If someone does go that far the female officers will have deal with the occasional schlong and the army gets a new female soldier. Not really the worst thing.Ad Hominem.Women injured more frequently, and shoot less accurately.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2015/09/10/marine-experiment-finds-women-get-injured-more-frequently-shoot-less-accurately-than-men/Units comprising all men also were faster than units with women while completing tactical movements in combat situations, especially in units with large crew-served weapons like heavy machine guns and mortars, the study found.
Infantry squads comprising men only also had better accuracy than squads with women in them, with notable difference between genders for every individual weapons system used by infantry rifleman units. They include the M4 carbine, the M27 infantry automatic rifle (IAR) and the M203, a single-shot grenade launcher mounted to rifles, the study found.
The research also found that male Marines who have not received infantry training were still more accurate using firearms than women who have. And in removing wounded troops from the battlefield, there were notable differences in execution times between all-male and gender-integrated groups, with the exception being when a single person most often a male Marine carried someone away, the study found.KhanofKhans, KhanJohnson, Saloonist, BasileosFlasbangs posted...Why is it only on the internet you ever hear about this stupid gender s***? It's like it doesn't exist in real life.
Because it's a very small group that really pushes this stuff. Those who are against it and act like it taking over the country do more to spread this s*** around than the actual people do. Case in point, this topic.TheVipaGTS posted...Flasbangs posted...
Why is it only on the internet you ever hear about this stupid gender s***? It's like it doesn't exist in real life.
Because it's a very small group that really pushes this stuff. Those who are against it and act like it taking over the country do more to spread this s*** around than the actual people do. Case in point, this topic.
Or perhaps you people are so blind to the fact that a vocal minority has infected every branch of our society with their disgusting ideology that you fail to even notice that lives will be lost because of it.KhanofKhans, KhanJohnson, Saloonist, BasileosDash_Harber posted...How does this effect the military's capabilities in one bit?
Spoken like a true civilian.
Webmaster4531 posted...I never got any proof of rampant sex in school bathrooms.
Good thing your doubts don't require any.Dash_Harber posted...Flasbangs posted...
Why is it only on the internet you ever hear about this stupid gender s***? It's like it doesn't exist in real life.
Because in real life people go, "Okay" and move on. How does this effect the military's capabilities in one bit? It doesn't. How does it effect the average man on the street one bit? It doesn't. All it does it make it easier to recruit possible soldiers who are transgender, which is a net positive for both the military and the people who want to join but feel their gender might endanger it.
But no, the military is somehow a victim in all this, and it's some sort of ideological war that is a personal attack on anyone who is offended. Meanwhile, those same people won't shut up about how everyone they hate is just easily offended and how they bully people and how bullying builds character but not when it's directed at them, and all that hypocritical fun.
/topicAxiom posted...Dash_Harber posted...
Flasbangs posted...
Why is it only on the internet you ever hear about this stupid gender s***? It's like it doesn't exist in real life.
Because in real life people go, "Okay" and move on. How does this effect the military's capabilities in one bit? It doesn't. How does it effect the average man on the street one bit? It doesn't. All it does it make it easier to recruit possible soldiers who are transgender, which is a net positive for both the military and the people who want to join but feel their gender might endanger it.
But no, the military is somehow a victim in all this, and it's some sort of ideological war that is a personal attack on anyone who is offended. Meanwhile, those same people won't shut up about how everyone they hate is just easily offended and how they bully people and how bullying builds character but not when it's directed at them, and all that hypocritical fun.
/topic
How is it /topic when I've literally posted a link of a study conducted by the military which shows all sorts of bad results from lowering standards to admit women? And now we're lowering them for certain male-bodied individuals too? People will literally die because of these decisions.KhanofKhans, KhanJohnson, Saloonist, Basileos- Boards
- Current Events
- Military the newest victim of transgender political correctness
- Boards
- Current Events
- Military the newest victim of transgender political correctness
Dash_Harber posted...Callixtus posted...
Women do not have to meet the same physical requirements as men, which absolutely has real worlx effects.
Do you have some specific examples?
Callixtus posted...But yes I do think someone will.
So, instead of punishing wrong doers, you think we should just punish everyone?
As far as women go, studies seem to be conflicting and simply saying "Women are weaker" is actually wrong since strength is defined in a number of important ways (but that is a bit off-topic);
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/jun/11/the-weaker-sex-science-that-shows-women-are-stronger-than-men
I f***ing said it earlier just look at women in ranger school
This isn't some sexist stuff. If a person really believes that a woman in combat is the same as a man is a f***ing idiotSteve Nash | 13| Phoenix Suns | PPG: 16.9 | RPG: 3.60 | APG 11.3 | EFF: +22.96
http://www.gifsoup.com/view3/2283379/dance-o.gifMark_DeRosa posted...This isn't some sexist stuff. If a person really believes that a woman in combat is the same as a man is a f***ing idiot
I think it depends on the type of combat. I don't think women would have any trouble being snipers. It all depends on what you excel at.OpheliaAdenade posted...Mark_DeRosa posted...
This isn't some sexist stuff. If a person really believes that a woman in combat is the same as a man is a f***ing idiot
I think it depends on the type of combat. I don't think women would have any trouble being snipers. It all depends on what you excel at.
At least it should theoretically become less complicated within the next century as exo-suits and drone/robotic warfare inevitably progress.OpheliaAdenade posted...Mark_DeRosa posted...
This isn't some sexist stuff. If a person really believes that a woman in combat is the same as a man is a f***ing idiot
I think it depends on the type of combat. I don't think women would have any trouble being snipers. It all depends on what you excel at.
No one cares what you think. Unless you have evidence, your opinion is meaningless.
But I have posted evidence that women are less accurate shooters than men, that they are injured more frequently, that they are weaker, that they slow down tactical maneuvers, that their insertion into male dominated spaces causes all sorts of unnecessary romantic drama. I can add a litany of other negatives stemming from their inclusion if necessary with various sources. Meanwhile, all of these things are avoided with all male combat forces.
No one wants your speculation.KhanofKhans, KhanJohnson, Saloonist, BasileosOpheliaAdenade posted...Mark_DeRosa posted...
This isn't some sexist stuff. If a person really believes that a woman in combat is the same as a man is a f***ing idiot
I think it depends on the type of combat. I don't think women would have any trouble being snipers. It all depends on what you excel at.
I think everyone is really referring to boots on ground. Do you know how hard it is to be a sniper? Look up sniper school. It's one of the hardest courses the army has to offer. It's brutalCubs, Rockies, A's, Grizzlies, Bulls, Cowboys, Patriots.darkprince45 posted...Now that I think about it, how hard do you think it will be for a woman sniper today? Full suit with a barrett 50 cal. Low crawling several miles
Sniper Wolf made it look easy though. :( She was so good at it.Having moved between three commands within my time in the Navy between this being put out Navy-wide and getting out of the Navy earlier this February, I can say with full confidence that there is almost no sane person in the armed forces who think this is a good idea. It's all just pressure coming down from the top to appeal to the f***ing civvies who b**** about the military not being PC enough.
Even going through with the process of transitioning is a logistical nightmare for shipboard billets because ships are only billetted for a certain amount of certain jobs, and in going through with gender and lifestyle transitioning testing, you are placed on shore duty, TAD from your ship but still billetted on your ship to return once you successfully transition to your preferred gender (or fail to do so within a year). So not only are you hampering the forces by choosing to transition and waste time on your enlistment/commission time, but you are also taking a billet on a ship that doesn't even have you on board, and can't get a replacement for you because they can't get more billets.
This whole situation is a f***ing disgrace to our armed forces, in my honest opinion.3DS: 1590-4884-9269 | Discord Chat for online gaming with Chaos! https://discord.gg/hDQ6rWb
The more you learn, the less you know, maaan..."Victim"
"Political Correctness"
KCallixtus posted...OpheliaAdenade posted...
Mark_DeRosa posted...
This isn't some sexist stuff. If a person really believes that a woman in combat is the same as a man is a f***ing idiot
I think it depends on the type of combat. I don't think women would have any trouble being snipers. It all depends on what you excel at.
No one cares what you think. Unless you have evidence, your opinion is meaningless.
But I have posted evidence that women are less accurate shooters than men
Blatantly false
that they are injured more frequently
Uh what? This makes no sense given the state of modern warfare
that they are weaker
What's your point? You do realize that everyone is different, correct? Not every chick is going to be a Mary Jane
that they slow down tactical maneuvers
Again, depends entirely on the soldier
that their insertion into male dominated spaces causes all sorts of unnecessary romantic drama
And, your point? Romance goes two ways.
No one wants your speculation.
And nobody cares about your s***ty subjective opinions lolSamurontai posted...Callixtus posted...
OpheliaAdenade posted...
Mark_DeRosa posted...
This isn't some sexist stuff. If a person really believes that a woman in combat is the same as a man is a f***ing idiot
I think it depends on the type of combat. I don't think women would have any trouble being snipers. It all depends on what you excel at.
No one cares what you think. Unless you have evidence, your opinion is meaningless.
But I have posted evidence that women are less accurate shooters than men
Blatantly false
that they are injured more frequently
Uh what? This makes no sense given the state of modern warfare
that they are weaker
What's your point? You do realize that everyone is different, correct? Not every chick is going to be a Mary Jane
that they slow down tactical maneuvers
Again, depends entirely on the soldier
that their insertion into male dominated spaces causes all sorts of unnecessary romantic drama
And, your point? Romance goes two ways.
No one wants your speculation.
And nobody cares about your s***ty subjective opinions lol
Lol literally saying a study conducted by the marines isn't relevant to modern warfare. Because Samurontai knows more about modern combat than the actual military.KhanofKhans, KhanJohnson, Saloonist, BasileosCallixtus posted...Lol literally saying a study conductedby the marines isn't relevant to modern warfare. Because Samurontai knows more about modern combat than the actual military.
why do you care so muchWait, 42 pushups is combat ready? And females only need 19? What even are those numbers?!
Huh, all those years I was afraid of getting drafted, turns out it's impossible for me to serve anyway.Samurontai posted..."Victim"
"Political Correctness"
K
People that scream for political correctness have the biggest victim complexes in historyRESIDENT EVIL COMMUNITY BOARD
http://www.gamefaqs.com/boards/1074-resident-evil-past-present-and-futureOpheliaAdenade posted...Callixtus posted...
Lol literally saying a study conductedby the marines isn't relevant to modern warfare. Because Samurontai knows more about modern combat than the actual military.
why do you care so much
Why shouldn't I care that people will literally die just so we can have female and transgender soldiers? Why don't you care more?KhanofKhans, KhanJohnson, Saloonist, BasileosThis nonsense ughCallixtus posted...OpheliaAdenade posted...
Callixtus posted...
Lol literally saying a study conductedby the marines isn't relevant to modern warfare. Because Samurontai knows more about modern combat than the actual military.
why do you care so much
Why shouldn't I care that people will literally die just so we can have female and transgender soldiers? Why don't you care more?
People die all the time in war.OpheliaAdenade posted...Callixtus posted...
OpheliaAdenade posted...
Callixtus posted...
Lol literally saying a study conductedby the marines isn't relevant to modern warfare. Because Samurontai knows more about modern combat than the actual military.
why do you care so much
Why shouldn't I care that people will literally die just so we can have female and transgender soldiers? Why don't you care more?
People die all the time in war.
Normally, you try to prevent your own soldiers from dying, not put them in situations needlessly where more of them will die.
Are you obtuse?KhanofKhans, KhanJohnson, Saloonist, BasileosActually, 42 push-ups is kind of a lot if you're decently muscled/built. If you're the world's skinniest guy, body weight exercises are easy.
What I'd like to see is soldiers being ranked on their ability to carry wounded soldiers out of combat zones. Sure, you can lift yourself but that's easy for the skinny guys. I wanna see 'em carry a wounded comrade out of a fire right."Oh, my mother; oh, my friends, ask the angels, will I ever see heaven again?" - Laura MarlingOpheliaAdenade posted...Callixtus posted...
OpheliaAdenade posted...
Callixtus posted...
Lol literally saying a study conductedby the marines isn't relevant to modern warfare. Because Samurontai knows more about modern combat than the actual military.
why do you care so much
Why shouldn't I care that people will literally die just so we can have female and transgender soldiers? Why don't you care more?
People die all the time in war.
I want you to remember that no bastard ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor, dumb bastard die for his country.Hmm...- Boards
- Current Events
- Military the newest victim of transgender political correctness
No comments:
Post a Comment