Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Trump announces transgender people cannot serve in US military Watch

    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Cubone-r)
    No problem! It's quite a startling read. Someone who has dedicated their whole life to the study of gender dyshoria gets treated so badly just because the research suggests a certain result. Science should never be politicised.
    I absolutely agree. Science should never be politicised.

    Gender dysphoria is a sensitive subject, and everyone has different views.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 999tigger)
    You dont respect or believe in the principle of diversity. Are you also against equality for women and L/G/B in the military as well?
    .
    The "principle" of diversity? Give me a break. There is no such absolute principle, it is leftie piffle.

    Do you believe in a "diversity" of cancers? The more different and varied ones in the world the better?

    I tell you one thing you DON'T believe in. Diversity of opinion.

    And yes, I am against "equality" for women and LGB in the forces too. Our armed forces exist to protect us, not promote "equality."

    If women or gay people are equally good at fighting for us in the roles given to them, and they are prepared to serve, good on them. But I don't think people less effective should be given those roles on grounds of "social justice."

    And neither would you if we were ever attacked.
    • Very Important Poster
    Offline

    19
    (Original post by astutehirstute)
    The "principle" of diversity? Give me a break. There is no such absolute principle, it is leftie piffle.

    Do you believe in a "diversity" of cancers? The more different and varied ones in the world the better?

    I tell you one thing you DON'T believe in. Diversity of opinion.

    And yes, I am against "equality" for women and LGB in the forces too. Our armed forces exist to protect us, not promote "equality."

    If women or gay people are equally good at fighting for us in the roles given to them, and they are prepared to serve, good on them. But I don't think people less effective should be given those roles on grounds of "social justice."

    And neither would you if we were ever attacked.

    What about ethnic minorities are you against those as well?

    Again you show your ignorance.

    They arent given the roles on the basis of being transgender, they have to complete and show competency for the job just like everyone else.
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by shameful_burrito)
    He's secretly jealous of them, mark my words

    Spoiler:
    Show
    I will never be able to un-remember that.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Cant stump the Trump hell yh one of the only good things he has done.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Golden State)
    I absolutely agree. Science should never be politicised.

    Gender dysphoria is a sensitive subject, and everyone has different views.
    Yes, but when numerous research papers from the US and Europe suggest that around ~90% of their transgender samples have other mental health issues (other than gender dysphoria) such as depression, anxiety, stress, and so on.. and around 30% are committing suicide because of these untreated mental illnesses, I'd argue there is only one logical view.

    The researchers in the field therefore suggest transitioning someone to the opposite gender is clearly not helping a significant chunk of people as practitioners are viewing the surgery as a "curative" process while not actually tackling the underlying mental health issues associated with it.

    Further, when the American Psychological Association (APA) and World Health Organisation start talking about gender dysphoria as a mental disorder and it becomes included in DSM-5 and ICD-10 (the current manuals for mental illness that all health professionals use) then I would argue only one view prevails (or seems to be the only logical one imo), we need to start implementing actual treatment plans to help these people with their mental health issues rather than just viewing transitioning as the treatment, as it clearly isn't for a significant amount of people.

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19105079
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21364939
    http://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/arti...ticleID=176330
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23398495

    Anyway, back on topic. As long as transgender individuals who want to serve pass all the necessary mental health checks, they should be allowed to serve, obviously.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 999tigger)
    What about ethnic minorities are you against those as well?

    Again you show your ignorance.

    They arent given the roles on the basis of being transgender, they have to complete and show competency for the job just like everyone else.
    They are given the roles to promote equality and diversity, you heard the effete Admiral. Not because they were the best in free and fair competition.

    Anybody who has ever encountered the products of affirmative action in a public organisation knows this to be true. People promoted into roles for which they are ill suited, to fill some quota that celebrates "diversity."
    • Reporter Team
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Cubone-r)
    No problem! It's quite a startling read. Someone who has dedicated their whole life to the study of gender dyshoria gets treated so badly just because the research suggests a certain result. Science should never be politicised.
    The issue in your example is around how treatment of childhood body dysmorphia should be handled, not on whether or not adult BD is considered a mental illness. From what I can tell Zuecker has never made that claim and certainly was not fired for it.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Cubone-r)
    Yes, but when numerous research papers from the US and Europe suggest that around ~90% of their transgender samples have other mental health issues (other than gender dysphoria) such as depression, anxiety, stress, and so on.. and around 30% are committing suicide because of these untreated mental illnesses, I'd argue there is only one logical view.

    The researchers in the field therefore suggest transitioning someone to the opposite gender is clearly not helping a significant chunk of people as practitioners are viewing the surgery as a "curative" process while not actually tackling the underlying mental health issues associated with it.

    Further, when the American Psychological Association (APA) and World Health Organisation start talking about gender disphoria as a mental disorder and it becomes included in DSM-5 and ICD-10 (the current manuals for mental illness that all health professionals use) then I would argue only one view prevails (or seems to be the only logical one imo), we need to start helping and implementing actual treatment plans to help these people with their mental health issues rather than just viewing transitioning as the treatment, as it clearly isn't for a significant amount of people.

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19105079
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21364939
    http://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/arti...ticleID=176330
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23398495

    Anyway, back on topic. As long as transgender individuals who want to serve pass all the necessary mental health checks, they should be allowed to serve, obviously.
    Thanks for sharing those research papers. I will definitely read them. I agree that as long as individuals have passed mental health checks, they should be allowed to serve.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Gofre)
    The issue in your example is around how treatment of childhood body dysmorphia should be handled, not on whether or not adult BD is considered a mental illness. From what I can tell Zuecker has never made that claim and certainly was not fired for it.
    There was heavy pressure from the LGBT lobby to have him fired for his research on gender dysphoria and the unfounded allegations that he was insulting patients.

    Zucker has published many papers that clearly state gender dysphoria is a mental disorder. It is in DSM-5 and ICD-10 (for both children and adults). It is hardly a controversial claim.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Nothing turns on a liberal more than destroying everything the conservative right stands for, so try to ban transsexuals from the miltiary and suddenly that's the next big civil rights issue, whereas if a left wing government had done this it wouldn't be a problem.

    • Reporter Team
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Cubone-r)
    There was heavy pressure from the LGBT lobby to have him fired for his research on gender dysphoria and the unfounded allegations that he was insulting patients.

    Zucker has published many papers that clearly state gender dysphoria is a mental disorder. It is in DSM-5 and ICD-10 (for both children and adults). It is hardly a controversial claim.
    I agree that he was targeted for an area of his research combined with the false allegations described in the link you've posted. My point was that he wasn't fired for describing GD as a mental illness- as you said, it's not a particularly controversial claim on this field of science and the volume of work he is cited on is a testament to that, but rather for his clinic's approach to treating the condition in children.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Gofre)
    I agree that he was targeted for an area of his research combined with the false allegations described in the link you've posted. My point was that he wasn't fired for describing GD as a mental illness- as you said, it's not a particularly controversial claim on this field of science and the volume of work he is cited on is a testament to that, but rather for his clinic's approach to treating the condition in children.
    I stand corrected if that is not the case. However, from my experience a lot of individuals from the LGBT community would have trouble with the notion that transgenderism is a mental disorder and I feel their views on that would have gone some way to contributing toward the pressure they put on him.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nulli tertius)
    This doesn't work in the echo chamber of modern social media.
    True enough, but nor does censorship. All it does is reinforce such chambers, just look at for example the state of universities in the current time
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by astutehirstute)

    And yes, I am against "equality" for women and LGB in the forces too. Our armed forces exist to protect us, not promote "equality."

    If women or gay people are equally good at fighting for us in the roles given to them, and they are prepared to serve, good on them. But I don't think people less effective should be given those roles on grounds of "social justice."

    And neither would you if we were ever attacked.

    Article/ interview with trans members of military :

    Transgender airman: ‘I would like to see them try to kick me out of my military’
    Attachment 677540

    “I have never described myself as trans; I’m a mother----ing Marine,” < one of my fav quotes from this article!

    I don't think these trans people would say they're less 'effective'
    • Community Assistant
    • Political Ambassador
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    I'm quite glad we aren't following him. But this will definitely make his LGBT voters turn their backs, great job.
    • Section Leader
    • Clearing and Applications Advisor
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    http://www.politico.com/story/2017/0...41029?lo=ap_a1

    It would appear that the ban won't go ahead until the Secretary of Defence has been informed directly. Which just goes to show the chaos that is the Trump administration when he doesn't even inform the Secretary of Defence (and thus, officially inform the Military) about such proposed changes :lol:
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    What a hypocritical ****
    • Reporter Team
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MrDystopia)
    http://www.politico.com/story/2017/0...41029?lo=ap_a1

    It would appear that the ban won't go ahead until the Secretary of Defence has been informed directly. Which just goes to show the chaos that is the Trump administration when he doesn't even inform the Secretary of Defence (and thus, officially inform the Military) about such proposed changes :lol:
    He also claimed that he came to this decision after "consultation with my generals and military experts", he must have skipped over the two highest ranking generals he had and homed in on the boot lickers.
    • TSR Group Staff
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MrDystopia)
    http://www.politico.com/story/2017/0...41029?lo=ap_a1

    It would appear that the ban won't go ahead until the Secretary of Defence has been informed directly. Which just goes to show the chaos that is the Trump administration when he doesn't even inform the Secretary of Defence (and thus, officially inform the Military) about such proposed changes :lol:
    Does he imagine that if he tweets something the rest of the country will just scramble to meet whatever decision he's just made? What an utter pillock.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: August 3, 2017
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Should Spain allow Catalonia to declare independence?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.