Get Task & Purpose in your inbox
Here's What The Data Actually Says About Transgender Military Service
As of Jan. 1, transgender individuals are allowed to openly enlist and continue serving in the U.S. military without fear of being discharged.
President Donald Trump issued a ban on transgender military service in August 2017. It was struck down by U.S. District Court Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly last fall. In December, the Department of Defense announced it would allow transgender people to enlist in 2018.
In a strongly worded 76-page opinion, Kollar-Kotelly wrote: “There is absolutely no support for the claim that the ongoing service of transgender people would have any negative effects on the military.”
And she’s right. Since 2014, we have been working with transgender service members and veterans to better understand their experiences. It is part of a large and growing body of scientific research President Trump, and conservatives more broadly, have ignored.
In the United States, transgender individuals were officially barred from serving in the armed forces starting in the 1960s. The early prohibition was based on a now-outdated psychiatric classification. Until 2013, the American Psychiatric Association classified transgender people as having “gender identity disorder.” This disqualified them for military service, along with anyone else who exhibited a mental disorder.
Since the 1980s, the U.S. armed forces barred service of any person with a “current or history of psychosexual conditions including but not limited to exhibitionism, transsexualism, transvestism, voyeurism, and other paraphilia.” However, the view that transgender people have a pathological condition conflates transgender identity with mental illness and distress. It assumes that all transgender people experience gender dysphoria. Gender dysphoria relates to distress caused when an individual’s assigned sex at birth is incongruent with their current gender identity or expression. Not all transgender people experience it.
In 2015, the American Medical Association adopted a formal policy stating that there is no medical rationale for excluding transgender people from openly serving in the military.
Serving under the ban
Transgender people have long served in the armed forces. The Williams Institute, a think tank at the University of California in Los Angeles, estimates that roughly 134,000 transgender Americans hold veteran status.
About 15,000 transgender people are currently serving across all branches of the U.S. armed forces, including the National Guard and Reserve forces. The vast majority have served under the transgender ban.
In our research, we have found that transgender service members have had to conceal their identities. In fact, among transgender service members surveyed under the transgender military ban, only 16.2 percent reported being “out” as transgender to friends within their military unit. Only 5.6 percent were out to their commanding officer.
This was in stark contrast to the personal lives of service members where the majority of those surveyed reported being out to immediate family members (72.2 %) and nonmilitary friends (69.4 %). This has limited their access to support services and health care, and made it difficult to gain institutional recognition.
Our findings also suggest that transgender individuals enlist for many of the same reasons as cisgender men and women, those whose assigned sex at birth corresponds with their gender identity. Transgender people are motivated by educational goals, career aspirations, travel, family history, patriotism and stability. Transgender service members also report few mental or physical health issues that would limit them from meeting fitness criteria.
Research conducted by the nonprofit RAND National Defense Research Institute has found similar evidence. RAND was commissioned by the government to conduct a wide-ranging external study to assess the impact of transgender service.
RAND reported that the Departments of Defense Homeland Security would incur only small increases in annual health care cost, estimated between US$2.4 million to $8.4 million, representing only .04 to .13 percent of the budget. That is in direct contrast to President Trump’s justification for the ban, as he cited “tremendous medical costs.” Further, the report observed that transgender service has minimal impact on unit readiness and cohesion. And, it recommended that military fitness policies align with contemporary medical standards.
Impact of a military ban
President Trump’s memorandum referenced inaccurate information. Further, the administration’s effort undermines several rigorous scientific studies and peer-reviewed publications, the expert opinions of military leaders and officers, and the medical recommendations of our nation’s leading professional organizations.
Most concerning, however, is that the current commander-in-chief discredits the service and sacrifices of tens of thousands of transgender veterans and service members. They have served and will continue to proudly serve our country despite persistent injustice and inequality.
Brandon Hill is the executive director of the Center for Interdisciplinary Inquiry and Innovation in Sexual and Reproductive Health, University of Chicago. Joshua Trey Barnett is a professor of rhetoric at University of Minnesota Duluth. This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.
CAIRO (Reuters) - After losing territory, ISIS fighters are turning to guerrilla war — and the group's newspaper is telling them exactly how to do it.
In recent weeks, IS's al-Naba online newspaper has encouraged followers to adopt guerrilla tactics and published detailed instructions on how to carry out hit-and-run operations.
The group is using such tactics in places where it aims to expand beyond Iraq and Syria. While IS has tried this approach before, the guidelines make clear the group is adopting it as standard operating procedure.
A sprawling new survey says a ‘culture of resilience’ helped US military families weather housing woes for years
A new survey of thousands of military families released on Wednesday paints a negative picture of privatized military housing, to say the least.
The Military Family Advisory Network surveyed 15,901 adults at 160 locations around the country who are either currently living in privatized military housing, or had lived in privatized housing within the last three years. One of the report's primary takeaways can be summarized in two lines: "Most responses, 93 percent, came from residents living in housing managed by six companies. None of them had average satisfaction rates at or above neutral."
Those six companies are Lincoln Military Housing, Balfour Beatty, Hunt, Lendlease/Winn, Corvias, and Michaels.
What's behind these responses? MFAN points to the "culture of resilience" found in the military community for why military families may be downplaying the severity of their situations, or putting up with subpar conditions.
"[Military] families will try to manage grim living conditions without complaint," MFAN says in its report. "The norm of managing through challenges, no matter their severity, is deeply established in military family life."
Judge approves negligence lawsuit against Air Force and Pentagon by victims of 2017 Sutherland Springs church massacre
The suit meets the criteria to fall under the Federal Tort Claims Act, which allows people to seek damages in certain cases if they can prove the U.S. Government was negligent, The Dallas Morning News reported.
Under most circumstances the doctrine of sovereign immunity protects the government from lawsuits, but in this case U.S. District Judge Xavier Rodriguez held that failure of the U.S. Air Force and the Department of Defense to log shooter Devin Kelley's history of mental health problems and violent behavior in an FBI database made them potentially liable.
ABOARD THE USS THEODORE ROOSEVELT -- Loose lips sink ships, but do they reveal too much about the hugely anticipated "Top Gun" sequel, "Top Gun: Maverick," filmed onboard in February?
Not on this carrier, they don't. Although sailors here dropped a few hints about spotting movie stars around the ship as it was docked in San Diego for the film shoot, no cats — or Tomcats — were let out of the bag.
"I can't talk about that," said Capt. Carlos Sardiello, who commands the Roosevelt.