Trump On LGBT In the Military: All About Political Correctness

[Carolyn Marie]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/10/03/heres-how-trump-responded-to-a-question-about-women-and-transgender-individuals-in-the-military/

 

Carolyn Marie

[Alejandra]

Hi Carolyn.  I want to thank you for working so hard to provide us all with such an unending stream of interesting topics for discussion. So I read the link that you provided in its entirety and as a former Democrat who was driven from the party of my parents by its radical shift to the hard left, I found little to fault in Trump's reaction.

Quote

"During a town hall-style event in Northern Virginia on Monday morning, a combat veteran asked Donald Trump what he would do about the "social engineering" that he says is happening in the military to allow women and transgender individuals to serve. The Republican presidential nominee agreed that the military has become too "politically correct" and said he would follow the recommendations of top military leaders."

 

[Carolyn Marie]

Alejandra, if the "top military leaders" were to advise a President Trump to go back to the days of "don't ask, don't tell," forbidding trans folk to continue their military service, and bar military service women from all the opportunities now open to them, would you be OK with that?

Carolyn Marie

[Alejandra]

29 minutes ago, Carolyn Marie said:

Alejandra, if the "top military leaders" were to advise a President Trump to go back to the days of "don't ask, don't tell," forbidding trans folk to continue their military service, and bar military service women from all the opportunities now open to them, would you be OK with that?

Carolyn Marie

I am not sure that would be the case. I and guessing the issue would be revisited with a view to reaching some equitable compromise.  It seems that you are assuming the worst.  My hope would be that the approach would put he needs of the military and its effectiveness in providing for the safety of America as a whole, above the needs of the individual. I personally think that the opportunities for all will continue to exist without impinging on the combat effectiveness of some of the military's most highly specialized and highly cohesive units.

You might think this harsh, but the enemies of this country are far beyond 'harsh' in their barbaric intent.

[Carolyn Marie]

56 minutes ago, Alejandra said:

I am not sure that would be the case. I and guessing the issue would be revisited with a view to reaching some equitable compromise.  It seems that you are assuming the worst.  My hope would be that the approach would put he needs of the military and its effectiveness in providing for the safety of America as a whole, above the needs of the individual. I personally think that the opportunities for all will continue to exist without impinging on the combat effectiveness of some of the military's most highly specialized and highly cohesive units.

You might think this harsh, but the enemies of this country are far beyond 'harsh' in their barbaric intent.

Yes, I am arguing a worst case scenario.  Given Mr. Trump's recent statements, and his agreement with the officer who asked the question, a more hopeful compromise outcome seems unlikely.  Given that all candidates for specialized field units are, and will continue to be, evaluated based on merit and physical ability, I am not concerned about combat effectiveness. 

What concerns me is that, under Mr. Trump's policies, the military would be permitted to go back to discriminating against people based on gender stereotypes and bias against LGBT service members.  That would denigrate the service of all those good people, and deprive America of some of its best soldiers, sailors and Air Force personnel.

Carolyn Marie

[Alejandra]

2 hours ago, Carolyn Marie said:

Yes, I am arguing a worst case scenario.  Given Mr. Trump's recent statements, and his agreement with the officer who asked the question, a more hopeful compromise outcome seems unlikely.  Given that all candidates for specialized field units are, and will continue to be, evaluated based on merit and physical ability, I am not concerned about combat effectiveness. 

What concerns me is that, under Mr. Trump's policies, the military would be permitted to go back to discriminating against people based on gender stereotypes and bias against LGBT service members.  That would denigrate the service of all those good people, and deprive America of some of its best soldiers, sailors and Air Force personnel.

Carolyn Marie

I will again point out that your worst case scenario is based on unsubstantiated "statements" being attributed to Mr. Trump by you or his political opponents. I honestly have no idea just what statements you are referring to.  In addition you are presuming to know what policies would be in a Trump administration.  I honestly have no problem how you choose to interpret what you seem to understand as factual reality. I just happen to disagree with all those presumptions of evil, hateful, anti-LGBT sentiments being attributed to Mr.Trump by his political adversaries on the Left.

All he said was that he was no fan of political correctness and that it needed fixing.  By that I choose to understand that it would mean a more reasonable empirically based approach rather than one dictated by a particular political agenda.

[Sakura]

The fighting effectiveness of a military is based on the cohesion and ability of the personnel to work together as a team. While I highly doubt that the transgender or homosexual individual solider lacks this ability if other soldiers refuse to bond and or work with them it causes a weakening of the chain.

I read a piece a while back ago that even thought don't ask don't tell has been lifted, many service men( males) choose to remain closeted for fear of ridicule or retaliation because the structure of the military is still geared toward that of the heroic manly man a "brotherhood" and that while the don't ask don't tell maybe gone... the mentality is still very much alive and well.

I mean if the military still can't get a handle of the rampant rape and sexual abuse and harassment that plagues our military how do they plan or even hope  to protect gay and trans gendered service members from harassment and abuse? 

This sudden need to enlist Trans folk and gays, remove the gender restrictions from both the draft and combat for females and trans. I do not believe this is at all being done in the name of progress forward thinking inclusion or political correctness. The military primarily the Army and Marines have a sever recruiting deficit. Last year they came up short some 60 thousand needed recruits to fill ranks and a drop in reenlistment. Nato continues to rattle sabres with Russia Obama keeps picking at China( who now has an unoffical alliance with Russia) and North Korea who our current admin continues to insult on a near monthly basis. All three of these Countries are obviously preparing for war all three have far far more man power than The US and Nato combined and while Obama has been cutting funding and development to our military all 3 have been developing and cultivating new technologies that make them an even more formidable  force. We are staring down the barrel of World War 3 and a draft will mostly likely be needed to fight the war to end all wars a draft that will soon likely include trans and females.

This is also the reason I plan to vote for Donald Trump. Contrary to popular( and liberal media) belief it is Hilary that I feel will lead us to Nuclear Armageddon. You think she is peeved about The DNC hacks now ? what happens when she has full control over our military? She already has a bullseye painted on Vladamir Putin so her next logical steps will be to escalate and exasperate and irritate tensions that have not been this high with the RU since the Cuban missile crisis.  

So  theoretical worst case policy changes aside I am more worried about events that simply keep worsening under the current Administration. events that will only escalate under another Democratic President and an event a conflict so dire so catastrophic so bloody that it will render every ones "rights" on this planet moot.

   

[Charlize]

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion.  I find the statement  that our military is weaker spurious.  Then again i don't get my "facts" from Fox.

I actually believe we should have a draft so that all members of society even the children of politicians and wealthy people can serve the country.  It need not be fully military but some form of service is necessary. 

By the way i doubt that a society where the GLBT community was accepted would be such a bad thing.  Many of histories first warriors were gay.  The problem is one of societies attitude not the functioning of the troops.  For years african american soldiers were denied a place in the military.  Attitudes can change but it takes time and a political will.

 

Hugs,

 

Charlize

 

[Jani]

1 hour ago, Sakura said:

I mean if the military still can't get a handle of the rampant rape and sexual abuse and harassment that plagues our military how do they plan or even hope  to protect gay and trans gendered service members from harassment and abuse? 

This is a serious concern that is not consistently dealt with across or within the service branches.  I do not admit to having a global solution but this problem must be resolved.  There might be those who would compare the rates to that in society in general but I reject that metric.  We have always held our military to a higher standard.

25 minutes ago, Charlize said:

I actually believe we should have a draft so that all members of society even the children of politicians and wealthy people can serve the country.

Agreed!  I have talked up this point for quite some time.  The current system seems to only gather everyone "other than" offspring of politicians and the wealthy.  Our military could use the diversity that is American society today.  When I enlisted near the end of the Vietnam era there seemed to be much more diversity, specifically economic.

Jani    

[Carolyn Marie]

Only 30 days until this is all over. What could possibly happen in 30 days???  

Carolyn Marie

[Cyndee]

On 10/8/2016 at 2:05 PM, Charlize said:

Then again i don't get my "facts" from Fox. 

 

 

 

@Charlize

 

Good for you Charlize especially in the context of history and where we are now more than 5 years into the future, yes I looked back at this thread because hindsight is clear 🙂 and it's quite interesting to read some of the comments here in this thread and perceptions at the time

 

Paul Harvey used to say "and now you know the rest of the story"

 

C

 

 

[Carolyn Marie]

Yes, Cyndee, it is kind of interesting to revisit this thread now that we know that the "unlikely" worst case scenario came to pass in a very big way.  And if an R is elected in 2024, especially if the R in question is Mr. Trump, that scenario will once again come to pass.  I wasn't wrong six years ago, and I won't be wrong this time, either.  But this time we will know exactly what to expect; no guessing required.  The only difference this time is that the R's are gunning for trans folk like they've never done before.

 

Carolyn Marie

[Phoenix]

On 2/27/2022 at 9:59 PM, Carolyn Marie said:

Yes, Cyndee, it is kind of interesting to revisit this thread now that we know that the "unlikely" worst case scenario came to pass in a very big way. 

The “worst case” has yet to come to pass.

 

Just as Sakura has pointed out, the military can’t even get a handle on rape and sexual assault and women have been allowed in the services for decades if not centuries.

 

I was in for seven years, just seven. And two of my three best friends were raped. My newest friend, so close we call each other sisters, was raped as well.

 

We can’t get a handle on that, or protecting gay/lesbian service members and now we’ll be introducing yet another marginalized group.

 

I do not envy the first… few dozen groups of trans service members. All I can say is I’m glad I’m out.