Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Obama Administration to Lift Transgender Military Ban

Obama Administration to Lift Transgender Military Ban

What could go wrong?

The Pentagon is preparing to announce a lift of the ban on transgender people serving in the U.S. military on July 1st. The left will undoubtedly hail this as a sign of progress but it turns years of policy on its head and raises a host of issues.

Will transgender troops be allowed to choose which barracks they live in? Which bathrooms will they use? These may sound like trivial questions but military life doesn’t afford much privacy.

USA Today reports:

Ban on transgender troops to be lifted July 1

The Pentagon plans to announce the repeal of its ban on transgender service members July 1, a controversial decision that would end nearly a year of internal wrangling among the services on how to allow those troops to serve openly, according to Defense officials.

Top personnel officials plan to meet as early as Monday to finalize details of the plan, and Deputy Defense Secretary Bob Work could sign off on it by Wednesday, according to a Defense official familiar with the timetable but who spoke on condition of anonymity because officials were not authorized to speak publicly about it. Final approval would come from Defense Secretary Ash Carter, and the announcement will be on the eve of the Fourth of July weekend.

The plan would direct each branch of the armed services over a one-year period to implement new policies affecting recruiting, housing and uniforms for transgender troops, one official said.

Carter announced last year that the ban, which affects a fraction of the military’s 1.3 million active duty members, would be lifted unless a review showed that doing so would have “adverse impact on military effectiveness and readiness.”

That phrase raised concerns on Capitol Hill where a key lawmaker questioned whether an “honest and balanced assessment” could be made of the effects on “military readiness, morale and good order and discipline” under Carter’s guidelines for the review.

However you feel about transgenderism, the bigger issue is military readiness. Under Obama, our military has been decimated while his administration has used our armed forces as a laboratory for progressive social issues.

Last month, Frank Gaffney of Secure Freedom Radio interviewed Elaine Donnelly, the President of the Center for Military Readiness, and she explained how and why this is happening:

The reason the military is a target for leftist activism is because everyone in the military must follow orders. Just like the mid-level or in general… who addressed the presidential commission, they’re not really free to dissent from the orders they’re given. This is what makes the military very vulnerable to leftist forces who want to use it to advance social agendas rather than improve its strength and readiness. The intangibles are even more important than what you can see with weapons, systems, ships and planes, how much money is spent on things involving training.

The military exists for one purpose and that is America’s defense. Our brave men and women in uniform should not be burdened with the task of advancing progressive agendas.

Featured image is a screencap from Fusion.

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

Combat units (as opposed to what are called “rear-echelon pukes” like bandsmen) live by a iron-clad rule expressed by SEALS…

“It’s all about unit-flucking-integrity”.

I can’t think of a more concerted effort to assail unit integrity than forcing various “gender” classes on combat units, including wimmins who are not held to the same physical fitness standards as existed BEFORE this became all the rage.

Amen Rags.
Do these people even know what they are talking about?! (NO!!)
They (Obama, etc.) think TG is “oh, I feel girly today” or “I feel tomboy today”. They are idiots!
There should be an extended period of counseling to determine first if a person is really capable of living as a new fe(male) and accepting the physical modifications necessary to outwardly resemble the new fe(male). Johns Hopkins used to do this for potential TG candidates but I think they quit because the counseling and physical modifications didn’t ultimately solve many candidates’ gender confusion issues. So is the Defense Department planning to do what Johns Hopkins couldn’t for what is likely to be a handful of people who actually might be serious?

Xenomethean | June 25, 2016 at 5:13 pm

This is an excuse for cowardly males to run from the front lines like a bunch of wussies(like Obama)! This is how we go from having a the most powerful military in the world to sissies with air soft guns.

So, if someone identifies as female, do they get to qualify based on the female physical training standards?

How about if every penis bearing member of the military decides to identify as female – will we then have the first all-woman military?

Transgender/homosexuals already serve openly. I guess Obama also wants to normalize crossovers in the transgender spectrum disorder. Still, why so selective?

Pro-choice is a many dysfunctional thing.

Muave camo is hawttt!

Everyone in government rates the label of traitor including every member of all the general staffs who refuse to resign over the desecration of their armed force component.

Why there hasn’t been a military coup under Obama is beyond me. Isn’t there a single Patriot with access that can take him off the field?

Obama could threaten ISIS “Surrender or we will send our transgendered troops in to use your bathrooms.”

During the Vietnam War they had a solution to this kind of stupidity. It was called fragging. When everybody was asleep, you rolled a live grenade into the tent of the offender.

Escaped from RI | June 26, 2016 at 11:10 am

I had to put good Soldiers out of the Army because they were insulin dependent and we couldn’t guarantee we could get them their insulin in various third world hellholes we deployed to. I guess we promise we can get testosterone or estrogen to the mentally ill to maintain whatever gender they believe they are?

    Arminius in reply to Escaped from RI. | June 27, 2016 at 8:12 am

    There’s an easy answer to your quandary. Obama is building a military that can’t deploy to those third world hell holes. He’s fulfilling a campaign promise he made back in 2008. Look it up if you don’t remember. He promised to not just end thets Iraq war but the “habits,” as he put it, that kept getting us into wars in the first place.

    One of those “habits” was maintaining powerful military and naval forces and sacrificing all else in the name of operational readiness.

    This is how it used to work:

    http://www.uscg.mil/history/articles/Carlton_Skinner.asp

    “U.S.S. Sea Cloud, IX-99, Racial Integration for Naval Efficiency”

    The Navy was using its manpower very inefficiently in WWII. Black sailors could only go to sea as stewards, which was something like 2-3% of the crew. That meant a lot of black sailors spent a lot of time ashore. This was very desirable duty that white sailors just couldn’t often get. They served in all ratings, most very much in demand on ships. There were actually race riots between white sailors, who thought it was unfair they were constantly at sea and risking their necks in combat while the black guys could stay ashore and have a good time, and black sailors who wanted to go to sea and were sick of being treated like second class citizens.

    The thing was, a lot of people already knew black sailors could get the job done. Nimitz was a proponent of reintegration; he had served in the Navy before Woodrow Wilson (D-racism) segregated it. Wilson didn’t force black sailors out but segregated the navy through attrition. Older black sailors could stay in their ratings. But Wilson decreed any new black sailors were restricted to the steward rating. When WWII broke out there were still a very few pre-Wilson black chiefs who were torpedomen, gunners mates, boatswains mates, etc. In addition the stewards had GQ stations everywhere from the gun mounts to the first aid stations. The other sailors knew the black sailors could do the job. Sometimes the gun captains would compete to get particular stewards on their gun crews.

    But there were few senior officers old enough to remember how things were before Wilson, and the performance of the few black stewards aboard ship (not all stewards were black, some were Filipino, and not all stewards were exemplary sailors) wouldn’t provide a clear or large enough picture. The Navy had to provide sufficient evidence if they were going to reintegrate the Navy. The Sea Cloud was the ship chosen for the experiment (not that big navy was on board with this from the start). The Sea Cloud proved two things. We were wasting a lot of talent by making all black sailors, regardless of civilian experience or aptitude, stewards. And you couldn’t have segregated ships like the army had segregated units like the Buffalo Soldiers. You just don’t create a 1st class petty officer or a chief or a naval officer capable of heading a department out of thin air. Ships would have to be integrated.

    To be fair, I know the army was doing the same sort of experiments/studies at the same time. Why, for instance, some commanders wondered am I sending cooks and anti-aircraft gunners into ground combat because I need infantry men? When there’s an infantry battalion behind the lines being used as laborers because they’re black.

    When Truman desegregated the military it was because we had solid evidence it would improve the military.

    As opposed to this President who does similar looking things because he likes to lecture us on “That’s not who we are!”

    We have solid evidence his changes are having the exact opposite effect. And they don’t care. Or, rather they do care, and its the effect they’re trying to achieve. I’m convinced it’s the latter.

    Recall the marines conducted trialls comparing mixed gender ground combat units to all male combat units. In every respect the mixed gender units were deficient compared to the all male units. The marines asked for a waiver from this policy. This was theoretically allowed which is why they went to all the trouble of conducting the trials and compiling the evidence in the first place. Poor marines, they didn’t know who the crowd of anti-Americans in this administration for who they really are. Secretary of the Navy Mabus simply shitcanned the report. He had his marching orders. “That’s not who we are.” This administration could care less that putting women in ground combat hurts readiness (sorry ladies, but it’s true).

    As an aside, when European countries opened ground combat including special forces to women they didn’t go as far as this klown kar administration is going. They didn’t start a drive to put women into those units. For instance I’m not aware of a single woman who has ever qualified in any of the Scandinavian countries’ special forces like the Danish Fromandskorpset (Frogman Corp, counterpart to our SEALs). But you watch, this administration, or rather the Clinton administration, will force the SEALs to accept a woman and lower the standards (as they did for those Rangers) so she’ll pass.

    How do you think the gays in the military integration is going.

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/mar/25/sailors-leaving-navy-over-stress-on-social-issues-/#ixzz3086QsID8

    “Sailors leaving Navy over stress on social issues, Top Gun instructor says

    A Navy F-18 fighter pilot and former Top Gun instructor is publicly warning admirals that retention is beginning to suffer from the military’s relentless social conditioning programs.

    Cmdr. Guy Snodgrass, until recently a Pentagon speech writer for the chief of naval operations, Adm. Jonathan Greenert, said sailors are becoming fed-up with the constant emphasis on social issues — an apparent reference to gays in the military, women in combat and ending sexual harassment.

    “Sailors continue to cite the over-focus on social issues by senior leadership, above and beyond discussions on war fighting — a fact that demoralizes junior and mid-grade officers alike,” Cmdr. Snodgrass wrote this month on the U.S. Naval Institute website, an independent forum for active and retired sailors and Marines.

    …“The U.S. Navy has a looming officer retention problem,” Cmdr. Snodgrass writes, adding there is an “erosion of trust in senior leadership.””

    I recall talking to some of my friends who are still in. A few of them thought it wasn’t going to be a big deal. I told them to wait and see if their opinion changed after they got their gay/gay ally command political commissar. Sure enough people are heading for the exits. This stuff also kills unit cohesion. But no matter how bad it gets for the troops, so bad they just refuse to take it anymore, any flag or general officer who knows what this administration looks for in someone who wants another star will tell the world, it’s going great! No problems whatsoever. Hence the “erosion of trust in senior leadership.”

    So, now transgenders. Who as you point out will be no more deployable than insulin dependent diabetics.

    That’s the point of all this. The social engineering has supersedes any and all concerns for combat readiness. Which is exactly what you expect from Obama who had eight years to so hopelessly screw the military up it’s completely useless as a military. Combat readiness? “That’s not who we are!” Anymore.

buckeyeminuteman | June 27, 2016 at 7:56 am

I know exactly how this is going to be implemented. Forced down everyone’s throats just like all the other social experiments under Obama. Comply with the new regulations of get booted.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend