Tech Leaders Speak Out Against Trump Ban on Transgender Troops (axios.com) 517
Technology executives, including Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg and Google CEO Sundar Pichai took to social media to voice their displeasure over President Donald Trump's latest stance on transgendered people in the military.
"I am grateful to the transgender members of the military for their service," Google CEO Sundar Pichai said.
Apple CEO Tim Cook said, "We are indebted to all who serve. Discrimination against anyone holds everyone back."
Brad Smith, Microsoft President and Chief Legal Officer said, "We honor and respect all who serve, including the transgender members of our military."
Salesforce said it "believes in equality for all. We support and thank all U.S. service members, including transgender Americans."
Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg said, "Everyone should be able to serve their country -- no matter who they are."
Veteran entrepreneur Max Levchin urged support for transgender people across party lines. "Trans kids, soldiers etc need our support today and to know they are valued & respected regardless of politics. Let us not be divided."
Uber told news outlet Axios, "We owe the deepest debt of gratitude to all those who volunteer to serve in the US Armed Forces and defend our values. These patriotic Americans deserve to be honored and respected, not turned away because of who they are."
Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey said, "Discrimination in any form is wrong for all of us."
"I am grateful to the transgender members of the military for their service," Google CEO Sundar Pichai said.
Apple CEO Tim Cook said, "We are indebted to all who serve. Discrimination against anyone holds everyone back."
Brad Smith, Microsoft President and Chief Legal Officer said, "We honor and respect all who serve, including the transgender members of our military."
Salesforce said it "believes in equality for all. We support and thank all U.S. service members, including transgender Americans."
Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg said, "Everyone should be able to serve their country -- no matter who they are."
Veteran entrepreneur Max Levchin urged support for transgender people across party lines. "Trans kids, soldiers etc need our support today and to know they are valued & respected regardless of politics. Let us not be divided."
Uber told news outlet Axios, "We owe the deepest debt of gratitude to all those who volunteer to serve in the US Armed Forces and defend our values. These patriotic Americans deserve to be honored and respected, not turned away because of who they are."
Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey said, "Discrimination in any form is wrong for all of us."
Cue the outrage! (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Cue the outrage! (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Cue the outrage! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
In our universe, religion supersedes facts.
A while ago, you couldn't say the Earth rotates around the Sun. Today, dare to say humans have exactly two genders, etc.
Re:Cue the outrage! (Score:4, Informative)
Humans do not have exactly two genders. Humans have two sexes. Gender identity is a related but distinct phenomenon, and gender expression is a further topic. You've never bothered to do even the slightest bit of research on gender development. Why don't you start with this article [nyu.edu], which gives an overview of current medical knowledge. If you have an argument with any research contained therein, please do be specific. This topic is actually fairly interesting from a neurobiological perspective, but having the conversation polluted by uninformed bigotry is, frankly, boring and ineffectual.
Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)
Any "studies" that discuss gender as being distinct from sex are not Science.
Re:Cue the outrage! (Score:5, Informative)
Trivially false. Gender identity is a result of hormonal action upon the brain, and that hormonal response necessarily happens as a separate process after the formation of the genitals. Please review the literature on the subject. [nyu.edu]
Comment removed (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
This does not treat any issue I discussed. The assumption being that you are incapable.
Re: (Score:3)
There isn't a definitive biological definition of sex. Chromosomes, genitals, hormone levels, none of them are clear cut or work on all cases.
There very much is. Male means having gonads for production of spermatozoa, female means having gonads for production of eggs. If neither exist, then the biological sex is neuter.
Re: (Score:2, Offtopic)
Any Medical Authority that accepts voluntary mutilation based on an utter lack of evidence does not deserve to be called an Authority, let alone Medical.
Re: (Score:2)
No medical "authority" claims that sex reassignment surgery changes a person's sex.
If you're not able to engage in sexual reproduction as a male/female, then you're not really male/female, are you?
And yes, classically, children and post-menopausal women were considered differently. Boys and girls were often dressed and treated the same. Post-menopausal women were crones. That's not an insult - a crone could range from being considered a wise, respected member of society, or a crazy old cat lady depending
Re: (Score:2)
http://transadvocate.com/fact-check-study-shows-transition-makes-trans-people-suicidal_n_15483.htm [transadvocate.com]
Re:Cue the outrage! (Score:5, Interesting)
Except that's not what happens. You end up with a person who believes they are female, but has a penis. They never think they're male. They believe themselves to be female.
In fact, there is a very genetic reason for this - you have to remember that a female has two X chromosomes, while a male has one X and one Y. When conception begins, the Y chromosome is not active. In fact, the fertilized egg multiplies as if it was female - yes, that includes early development of ovaries and a vagina. sometime later, around two weeks or so, the genes in the Y chromosome start to assert themselves and deactivating certain genes in the X chromosome. In effect, the Y chromosome patches the X chromosome. (This is standard - some genes deactivate other genes at certain times).
So what happens? Well, the vagina descends and becomes the scrotum, while the ovaries descend as well and transform into testes. Other genes are involved with hormone production - testosterone and others replace estrogen production. It's a wonderful example of reuse, since the testes and ovaries perform similar functions - just one produces an egg, the other, sperm. But they are both involved in producing cells with half the chromosomes.
Now, all this takes time, and while for the vast majority of people, it definitely happens, but genetic defects do happen, as well as errors. It's entirely possible that only part of the X chromosome is patched properly, so you get some of the male transition happening, but not all of it. So you end up with someone who's a little more ambiguous, and this conflict between who they feel they are and how their body develops causes a great deal of internal stress.
Chopping off their penis doesn't make them female - they were ambiguous and felt female to begin with, but always was identified biologically as male. Gender reassignment surgery helps relieve internal stress by making their perceived sex the same as their physical sex.
Re: (Score:2)
http://transadvocate.com/fact-check-study-shows-transition-makes-trans-people-suicidal_n_15483.htm [transadvocate.com]
Re:Cue the outrage! (Score:4, Interesting)
Sure, some of that comes down to mincing words, but it's pretty clear that whatever it is that is being experienced is an illness or it wouldn't go away with treatment. From what I've read, it appears as though there is some region of the brain that is responsible for the self's perception of gender and that it is possible for problems during fetal development for the brain to develop in an atypical manner, possibly as a result of incorrect or untimely hormone exposure. Gender dysphoria also seems to have a high comorbidity with other mental disorders, so there could be other factors at play as well.
I think people are reluctant to accept some of this because a lot of the science is relatively new and goes against the idea that environment or upbringing is somehow responsible for this. There's also probably a lot of pushback because there seems to be a new fad surrounding gender and sexual identity with young people creating new genders that don't have any basis in science (or at least none of which I'm aware) and a lot of people are looking at that and lumping all transexuals in with that crowd which leads them to dismiss the whole thing as nonsense.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
You've got two options:
1) bottom/top surgery + hormones is just cosmetic surgery and chemical use, no different that boob jobs and steroids for weightlifters, or other body mods. If people want it, great, but it's superficial, optional and elective.
2) bottom/top surgery + hormones is required to deal with severe mental problems, and without it, the sufferers of these mental problems will kill themselves.
If it's #1, then they don't deserve any special treatment or consideration - just because you put horns
Re: (Score:3)
So, you believe in #1: bottom/top surgery + hormones is just cosmetic surgery and chemical use, no different that boob jobs and steroids for weightlifters, or other body mods. If people want it, great, but it's superficial, optional and elective.
Given that I don't treat people with body mods for extended canine teeth like vampires, or people with body mods for bigger boobs like more attractive women (natural breast is best), or people who use steroids to bulk up any differently than the skinny guy who sits
Re: (Score:3)
The problem is the transsexual folks, still display a high rate of comorbidity with other other illness, suggesting they are probably still ill. More direct indicators like the suicide rate do not fall among those who have transitioned as compared to the gender dysphoric "community" as a whole. Suggesting that transitioning does not work. Its really self mutilation, nothing more an nothing less.
Re: (Score:2)
The problem is the transsexual folks, still display a high rate of comorbidity with other other illness, suggesting they are probably still ill.
This point would be directly contradicted by all studies on the matter. Yes, health outcomes still suck, but not necessarily at a greater rate than the general population after controlling for preexisting conditions and socioeconomic status. The problem is that the statistics for trans people before treatment are really quite shameful.
The conclusion of nearly all studies on the matter is that HRT+therapy+surgery as applicable leads to better health outcomes than not. If you're going to argue otherwise, I wo
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
It is also utterly false:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3043071/ [nih.gov]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, don't keep it all to yourself, tell us more about it!
Re: (Score:2)
Because a bunch of doctors can get bullied into being politically correct does not suddenly make "Gender Dysphoria" not an mental illness.
The facts are these folks have a much higher suicide rate than the general population, and a much higher rate of other "mental illness" which tends to suggests their other problems are aggravating and maybe not the root cause of their real troubles.
Finally Obama policy wanted the VA to pay for sexual re-assignment surgery, well hmm its not an illness than why do they requ
Re: (Score:2)
That's one finely honed conspiracy theory you got there.
does not suddenly make "Gender Dysphoria" not an mental illness.
Literally no one in this thread is making that claim.
The facts are these folks have a much higher suicide rate than the general population
So do dentists. Do you have the courage of your convictions to call for banning dentists as well?
So you are right the argument might not work as well as you th
Re: (Score:2)
IIRC, it happened with addyi and the FDA. Sprout used the "you're a sexist if you don't approve this drug" and the FDA approved it with very bad evidence of safety and efficacy.
Re: (Score:3)
The mental health field has been responding to bribery from rich aberosexuals for over 40 years now.
Re: (Score:2)
The fact that they are "moving away" is confirmation that the field of mental health field is not really Science.
Cancer is Cancer no matter what SJWs say. Medicine works like that. It's Science.
Mental health field, not so much.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3043071/ [nih.gov]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It's probably best considered a health condition, if we're not going to consider it as a normal outcome of human development. It should not be considered a disease or an illness, in the sense that people with this condition do not want to be 'cured'.
Re: (Score:3)
Where those of us in the real world are going is that pandering to mental illness instead of treating it shows significantly worse outcomes at the five year level.
Re: (Score:3)
All the more reason to exclude those with mental illnesses from endangering the troops.
Does that include the commander-in-chief?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Cue the outrage! (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
It was also widely used when the ISP privacy rules were reversed.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Why are people acting like there was a trans brigade charging the shores of Normandy?
Wartime is when the military STOPS banning LGBTs. During WW2, it was very difficult to avoid the draft, and plenty of LGBTs were inducted, and plenty of them landed on the Normandy beaches. It is only in peacetime that the military uses the excuse that LGBTs can't serve "because we need to win wars", but not when there is actually a war to be won.
Re: (Score:2)
Isn't that why they formed the WAACs and the other all-female auxiliary units of other branches during the war?
Re:Cue the outrage! (Score:5, Informative)
This is fairly disingenuous: yes, of course many homosexuals were drafted (and probably transgenders, although that as a legitimate CONCEPT and not a mental illness is relatively new) but in fact one of the few ways to actually successfully avoid the draft was to credibly convince your draft board that you were gay.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
"The United States military had a long-standing policy that service members found to be homosexual or to have engaged in homosexual conduct were to be court-martialed for sodomy, imprisoned and dishonorably discharged. However, with the mobilization of troops following the United States' entry into World War II, it became impractical to convene court-martial boards of commissioned officers and some commanders began issuing administrative discharges instead. Several waves of reform addressing the handling of homosexuals in the military resulted in a 1944 policy directive that called for homosexuals to be committed to military hospitals, examined by psychiatrists, and discharged under Regulation 615-360, section 8 as "unfit for service".[4] It is unknown exactly how many gay and lesbian service members were given blue discharges under this regulation, but in 1946 the Army estimated that it had issued between 49,000 and 68,000 blue discharges, with approximately 5,000 of them issued to homosexuals, while the Navy's estimates of blue-discharge homosexuals was around 4,000. The period of time covered by these estimates is unclear.[5]"
Hell, this continued well into Korea and even Vietnam, thus the schtick of Klinger and his constant attempt at Section 8 discharge in the popular TV show M*A*S*H.
So to suggest that "the army goes ahead and drafts LGBTs when they need them" is misleading at best. Historically, even during the draft LGBTs were considered at the very least insane and rejected from service if recognized as such.
Re: (Score:2)
The fuck does that have to do with anything?
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Actually it didn't go into effect until July 1, 2017. So it has been over THREE FULL WEEKS since trans were allowed in the military
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe because a trans brigade is charging Mass Media?
By that standard (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
(1) They have 20 hours to pass a black-box healthcare bill by Thursday
Really twitter (Score:5, Insightful)
US military (Score:4, Insightful)
So the US military will cease to be the target of more progressive social experiments for a few years. End of the world stuff right there; the virtuepocalypse is upon us!
New political function (Score:5, Funny)
foreach $personality ( @leftwing )
{
send_to_twitter( $personality . " is outraged at Trump for " . $trump_decision );
}
Zuckerberg and Pichai are experts!!! (Score:2)
They've spent years and years in the military!
Re: (Score:2)
They already serve (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:They already serve (Score:5, Insightful)
It's like he thinks he's on Reality TV (Score:5, Insightful)
Seriously.
As someone who spent seven years in active service, and trained many soldiers in Canada, worrying about someone's sexual orientation or whatever was dead last on my concerns. As in never spent a moment thinking about it, or caring about it.
Are we sure he's sane?
Re: (Score:2)
We can be sure he not only has never been in the military, but he knows fuck-all about it. On the other hand, he thinks that POWs are losers. Maybe he thinks they should go all samurai and disembowel themselves before suffering the dishonor of capture, who knows what's going on under that cotton ball of his.
I've never been in the military either, but my father was. That's one reason I wasn't. Not to piss him off, either. Not that I was ever big on his advice, but he definitely advised me not to join the arm
I don't understand the outrage (Score:5, Interesting)
I can't stand Trump, think he's already the worst President in our history, but I have no problems with this decision. I'm an army brat, I was in ROTC, went to basic, had all the training to be a military officer (just never signed up), and I know 1st hand and personally of people being either kicked out or prohibited from joining for all kinds of medical issues, some of them ancient history, some of their mildly debilitation. The idea that someone is going to physically alter their body in extremely intrusive fashion that requires all kinds of lifetime medical and even surgical regimens to maintain them and the military is supposed to 1.) pay for it 2.) make concessions for the other commitments to that surgery; is a real head scratcher.
My only problem is Trump obviously did it as another one of his twitter shiny bauble, public debate distractions.
Re:I don't understand the outrage (Score:4, Insightful)
The idea that someone is going to physically alter their body in extremely intrusive fashion that requires all kinds of lifetime medical and even surgical regimens to maintain them and the military is supposed to 1.) pay for it...
Seems like an odd statement considering what the military inflict on a lot of its employees. If you had to some up the US military in one sentence then physically altering bodies in an extremely intrusive fashion that requires all kinds of lifetime medical and even surgical regimens to maintain them, is about as accurate a statement as you can get.
But I get your point, and I could buy into it if Trump provided some numbers to back up the logic, eg Trans medical costs are X which is negatively affecting our defence capability for reasons Y. But from what I've seen, were talking numbers of 1 tomahawk missle per year total, ie chicken feed.
So it has nothing to costs (if it did I could support it), it has to do with the politics of division which the GOP are becoming addicted to. And this division is only weakening the country overall.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
I also like, "I may not agree with the religious message on your bumper sticker. But I will defend your right to stick it."
Re:Virtue signaling douche bags (Score:4, Insightful)
Agree. Why should tech CEO's or celebrities be a better source of general political ideas than Joe Sixpack? Opinions are like assholes: everyone has one. If they comment on technology as it intersects politics, then they can be considered subject matter experts; granted a biased one, but at least it would directly involve their field.
If military generals commented on this topic, it would be newsworthy because they have experience with military crew interaction. But if the military generals commented on say the iPhone's UI, their opinion is no more valid than Joe Sixpack's. (PS, yes, the Orange Man is a jerk.)
Re: (Score:3)
Agree. Why should tech CEO's or celebrities be a better source of general political ideas than Joe Sixpack? Opinions are like assholes: everyone has one.
Because these particular assholes have agendas and PR images. Everything they do publicly is to bolster their PR image and further their agendas.
Their agendas include gaining wealth and gaining power, not helping the common man. In fact, screwing the common man is a common tactic.
Re: (Score:2)
More proof that technology != biology in competency.
Re:Virtue signaling douche bags (Score:5, Insightful)
One of the great thing about our country is that they are allowed to voice their opinion, whether you care to hear it or not.
Pot
Sorry, don't like it? Leave.
Kettle
Re: Virtue signaling douche bags (Score:2, Insightful)
If that's the case, then why do we always see left-wingers resorting to censorship ("moderation") here, at reddit, and at so many other online discussion forums? Left-wingers only support freedom of speech when you're saying what they want to hear. Otherwise they want to silence you. We don't see this hatred of free speech from non-left-wingers.
Re:Virtue signaling douche bags (Score:4, Insightful)
One of the great thing about our country is that they are allowed to voice their opinion
Yeah, tell that to Trump supporters in Portland [pbs.org]. These days, being a Republican in a blue state can cost your your job, your friends, your property, your personal safety, even your life if you're not careful. It's part of what has driven me and many others away from the modern left.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I don't give a rat's a$$ about who one marries, who one f**ks, how one dresses. Do what you want.
But the military cares about suicide rates. It's a problem. Add to that the well document FACT that transgendered people commit suicide at a far greater rate than the average person (whether or not they have had surgery) and they (the military) have a good reason to be concerned.
Whether they should or should not prevent transgendered people
Re: (Score:3)
But the military cares about suicide rates. It's a problem. Add to that the well document FACT that transgendered people commit suicide at a far greater rate than the average person (whether or not they have had surgery) and they (the military) have a good reason to be concerned.
Why them particularly? And do you have a citation that says that the suicide rate and/or other health outcomes are equal or worse for transgender persons in the military as opposed to the general population?
Re:Virtue signaling douche bags (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
And I'm happy for you that you have no idea why that might be, but I did ask for some specific citations, not the first vaguely applicable paper to hand.
Re:Virtue signaling douche bags (Score:4, Interesting)
Given that 62.7% have an identifiable mental comorbidity, and 81.4% have a personality disorder, I think there's a very, very high probability that the high suicide rate comes from mental illness rather than societal pressures.
You don't have much conception of the societal pressures. Personally, I dealt with varying levels of depression from about age 8 until fairly recently, and it's been precisely the realization of how much of that was due to external pressures that has been key to ending that. One of the more punishing mental traps is the idea that you are somehow shameful or wrong for being who you are. That is just the tip of the proverbial iceberg, however. I mean, look at this forum; Slashdot is even one of the better-educated parts of the Internet.
As far as your studies go...oh boy. So the statistical error you're making is not considering or controlling for other confounding factors. Assault and various kinds of sexual and other abuse occur at a rate far higher than the general population, and these have well-documented effects on mental health. You're also interpreting a correlation as a causation, and specifically framing that causation in a manner which supports your prejudices when all evidence suggests the reverse. I also am forced to assume that you did not read anything of those studies beyond the abstract. You might have noticed that the one was published in "Psychiatry Journal", the other in "Medical Journal of Islamic Republic of Iran", and both of them were done in Iran. Even if there were some reason to believe that these were valid journals or good science, there's no justification for assuming that these figures correspond to conditions in the Western world.
So to repeat, I did ask for something other than the first paper that came to hand. And a minimum standard of politeness would involve reading it first.
Re:Virtue signaling douche bags (Score:5, Informative)
The suicide attempt rate among transgender persons ranges from 32% to 50% across the countries. Gender-based victimization, discrimination, bullying, violence, being rejected by the family, friends, and community; harassment by intimate partner, family members, police and public; discrimination and ill treatment at health-care system are the major risk factors that influence the suicidal behavior among transgender persons.
Re: (Score:3)
The " U.S. National Transgender Discrimination Survey " is a piece of shit, with poor methodology, huge selection bias, and they even admit that because the survey only had a budget of $3,000, they couldn't get a representative sample.
Any study based on that is doubly a piece of shit.
Anyone stupid enough to cite it is triply a piece of shit.
Re: (Score:2)
So is there any evidence that the suicide rate among the transgendered is significantly different than other enlisted? Military suicides are massive in the US armed forces, and that was true before we started allowing openly transgendered people to join the military.
Re: (Score:2)
The normal rate of suicide in the military is no where near the 40% suffered by Trans people.
See Train0987's post above for citations.
Re:Virtue signaling douche bags (Score:4, Informative)
See Train0987's post above for citations.
Okay, I found the post [slashdot.org] and well... I'm just starting to dig into the second citation and it is fucking garbage. I had to look at that one because the first site never actually responds. Hmm, with the power of google I found it on scribd [scribd.com]. I'll look at that in a minute, but let's talk about the second paper first. Its most relevant sources do not exist. Not just a simple 404, I googled for the ones which they claim directly support the headline and there's nothing, nada, zip and zilch. And the other papers which they claim generally support their claim... don't support their claim. It is a garbage citation and we can safely wipe our asses with it.
The first citation is of generally higher quality, even though the study it is based upon includes only about 6,500 valid respondents when there are about 1.5 million transgendered people in the USA, and only 75% of those were transgendered people (the rest were other people who describe their gender in complex terms.) Further, it counts suicide attempts, not suicides. The study does not say what you guys want it to say. In particular, it says that the suicide rate among trans respondents was only slightly higher than the rest of the respondents in the study. If you're not going to ban gays from the military, there's no real justification for banning the transgendered.
Whoops, I actually read the citations! Guess I wasn't supposed to do that.
Re:Virtue signaling douche bags (Score:5, Interesting)
The first citation is of generally higher quality, even though the study it is based upon includes only about 6,500 valid respondents when there are about 1.5 million transgendered people in the USA
It's hard to discern your point here -- are you suggesting that kind of sample size is way outside the norm for a study like this, and that it therefore may have significantly skewed the results? This actually seems like a fairly healthy sample size, and the p-values throughout the study reflect that.
Further, it counts suicide attempts, not suicides.
Again, your point is unclear. You can't possibly be saying that we shouldn't pay attention to a massively disproportionate rate of suicide attempts simply because some of them weren't successful.
The study does not say what you guys want it to say.
Whether or not anybody "wants it to," here's what the study actually says (emphasis mine):
The prevalence of suicide attempts among respondents to the National Transgender Discrimination Survey (NTDS), conducted by the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force and National Center for Transgender Equality , is 41 percent, which vastly exceeds the 4.6 percent of the overall U.S. population who report a lifetime suicide attempt , and is also higher than the 10-20 percent of lesbian, gay and bisexual adults who report ever attempting suicide.
Re:Virtue signaling douche bags (Score:4, Insightful)
The Military limits and even abrogates many rights simply due to the nature and mission of the organization.
We can't have people or missions endangered because of some SJW position.
The Generals have declared that is a danger.
The military doesn't pay for breast implants, they shouldn't pay for trans surgery. If they want to argue that they have to because it's a medical condition, then discharge them. People are discharged due to medical conditions all the time.
Re:Virtue signaling douche bags (Score:4, Insightful)
"The Generals have declared that is a danger."
The generals have very much NOT declared that it a danger.
The study from 2016 said it was no problem. The current study is not complete yet.
Meanwhile, the military is prohibited from selecting who it sees fit.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The Generals have declared that is a danger.
Is there data to back this up or could it be just the bigoted opinion of a few jerks? The same things were said about blacks, gays, and women.
The military doesn't pay for breast implants, they shouldn't pay for trans surgery.
If paying for trans surgery was the issue then POTUS could have ended the military's policy of covering that procedure. There are about 15,000 trans people in the US military. If ALL of them had surgery (w
Re: Virtue signaling douche bags (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Suicide rate for trans is around 40%. Before or after surgery.
Clearly the desire to be what you not is a symptom of something and not the something itself.
Re: (Score:2)
The rate remains the same regardless of how supportive their environment is.
Re: (Score:2)
That's just like, your opinion, man.
Re: (Score:2)
Strategic PR
In this case, "Virtue Signaling"
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
You can use quotation marks all you want. He was elected. He is the current President of the United States of America.
You don't have to like it, but lets face i t- the "vocal minority" has been dictating the nation's policy and direction for decades.
Re:Virtue signaling douche bags (Score:5, Insightful)
No that's projecting your issues not the military's it has nothing to do with hatred.
per my other post:
As a former Army combat grunt It has nothing to do with "mental illnesses" there's plenty of non-sexual problems with people on the front line it's more about not needing the SJW bullshit that comes along with it.
I'm not going to treat you any differently than the rest of the assholes getting shot at with me and nearly all of the B & T'ers I've meet can't help but push there issues at everyone around them.
Hell my best friend at the time was gay but he didn't advertise or act any differently when the uniform was on. There's allot of that in the US military it's the ones that can't act like a normal soldier that has real problems.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
This has NOTHING to do with any type of policy other than hatred. Everyone needs to stand up to the clueless, out of touch, orange douchbag
I bet the irony of this message is completely lost on the author.
Re: (Score:2)
And only a fool would care if s/he/? made the stockholders money.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I think this may be the most irrelevant /. submission ever.
Perhaps one of the eleven or so recruits that this will affect was a nerd before joining up.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
(not that I have anything against assholes, they have they uses... once a day).
You're just not imagining enough uses for assholes. You can use them all day, with practice and care.
Re: (Score:2)
Trump doesn't like any person or group so much that he wouldn't throw them under the bus if he finds it beneficial or even handily distracting for a moment. If he somehow stays in office for a full four years (even though it looks like there's a bombshell in his tax returns that he's desperate to keep hidden at all costs), he'll eventually even get around to his core supporters.
Re: (Score:2)
Quite the opposite, he didn't care about gays during election time but then he "evolved" on that issue and ended DADT.