Supreme Court Allows Transgender Military Ban

[MasterJedi]

https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/22/politics/scotus-transgender-ban/index.html

Next step for Republicans will be to try and get the gay members out, this was just the first step.

[Landslide Lyndon]

The sound you hear is all these WWC voters being relieved from their economic anxiety.

[Sir Mohamed]

Not surprised we end up with another nonsense 5-4 decision.

But Susan Collins told me Kavanaugh would be the moderate dude to protect LGBT rights and abortion.

[Ban my account ffs!]

This is cruel and unnecessary.  Get ready for lots more rulings like this.  There are going to be some tragic stories because of this.

[TML]

This isn't the final word yet - the SC merely allowed the ban to temporarily stand pending the final outcome of the actual litigation.

[Ban my account ffs!]

This isn't the final word yet - the SC merely allowed the ban to temporarily stand pending the final outcome of the actual litigation.

Yeah and the government workers working without pay are merely seeing a hiccup in their cash flow...pending the final outcome of the shutdown.

[7,052,770]

Transgender soldiers have served America in every war and peace since 1775. Sad that Republicans want to turn the military into a social experiment that excludes them.

[Reaganfan]

Transgender soldiers have served America in every war and peace since 1775. Sad that Republicans want to turn the military into a social experiment that excludes them.

I know about Klinger during Korea, but what??

[Blue3]

They did NOT approve it... they just said it would be in effect as it goes through the lower courts, and the earliest they can actually take it up is next year.

[Gass3268]

On the other hand they have decided not to hear the case on DACA, meaning Dreamers will be protected from deportation until the next term at the earliest.

[Calthrina950]

Transgender soldiers have served America in every war and peace since 1775. Sad that Republicans want to turn the military into a social experiment that excludes them.

I know about Klinger during Korea, but what??

Echoing this. I've read about the instances of crossdressing soldiers (i.e. women disguising themselves as men) during conflicts such as the Revolutionary War and the Civil War, but I have never read anything about transgender soldiers prior to the middle of the twentieth century. I wouldn't be surprised if there were, but the percentage was probably very insignificant. It is still insignificant now, as transgenders comprise a small fraction (~15,000 out of ~1.5-2 million) of the current armed forces.

[Reaganfan]

Transgender soldiers have served America in every war and peace since 1775. Sad that Republicans want to turn the military into a social experiment that excludes them.

I know about Klinger during Korea, but what??

Echoing this. I've read about the instances of crossdressing soldiers (i.e. women disguising themselves as men) during conflicts such as the Revolutionary War and the Civil War, but I have never read anything about transgender soldiers prior to the middle of the twentieth century. I wouldn't be surprised if there were, but the percentage was probably very insignificant. It is still insignificant now, as transgenders comprise a small fraction (~15,000 out of ~1.5-2 million) of the current armed forces.

That guy in WW2, too. Forget his name. They'll probably make a movie soon that'll end up winning Academy Awards.

[JA]

There’s absolutely no reason to ban transgender people from joining the military. There are no negative consequences that arise as a result, save, perhaps, for those attributable to the transphobia of American society. That burden, then, falls on the transphobes to adjust their behavior and views, not on transgender people to change anything about themselves.

I mean, I abhor the military and the notion of “service” therein, but so long as it exists as an institution, then any American deserves to be able to participate it in if they’re physically and mentally capable.

[Calthrina950]

Transgender soldiers have served America in every war and peace since 1775. Sad that Republicans want to turn the military into a social experiment that excludes them.

I know about Klinger during Korea, but what??

Echoing this. I've read about the instances of crossdressing soldiers (i.e. women disguising themselves as men) during conflicts such as the Revolutionary War and the Civil War, but I have never read anything about transgender soldiers prior to the middle of the twentieth century. I wouldn't be surprised if there were, but the percentage was probably very insignificant. It is still insignificant now, as transgenders comprise a small fraction (~15,000 out of ~1.5-2 million) of the current armed forces.

That guy in WW2, too. Forget his name. They'll probably make a movie soon that'll end up winning Academy Awards.

I wasn't even aware of this. But it only reinforces my point, that historically, the percentage of transgender soldiers in the military has been very insignificant. Now, this doesn't mean that I think they should be barred from serving. But I do understand the objections which have been put forth.

[7,052,770]

Transgender soldiers have served America in every war and peace since 1775. Sad that Republicans want to turn the military into a social experiment that excludes them.

I know about Klinger during Korea, but what??

There were over 200,000 Americans who served in the Revolution, and many more played other important roles in it. The numbers continue to rise in later wars. The odds that none of them were trans are effectively 0%.

L, G, B, T, and Q people have lived in America since the beginning and contributing to our society. It's a total myth that they didn't start appearing until the 1960s or whenever. Your grand parents, great grandparents, great grandparents, etc., all knew what all of those were, even if they may not have had the modern words for them that we do now.

[7,052,770]

Transgender soldiers have served America in every war and peace since 1775. Sad that Republicans want to turn the military into a social experiment that excludes them.

I know about Klinger during Korea, but what??

Echoing this. I've read about the instances of crossdressing soldiers (i.e. women disguising themselves as men) during conflicts such as the Revolutionary War and the Civil War, but I have never read anything about transgender soldiers prior to the middle of the twentieth century. I wouldn't be surprised if there were, but the percentage was probably very insignificant. It is still insignificant now, as transgenders comprise a small fraction (~15,000 out of ~1.5-2 million) of the current armed forces.

Crossdressing is not the same thing as transgender, as I think you are aware. However, before the late 20th century and hormone treatments, it would have been the only option for transgender Americans to fit into their preferred role in society.

[Huey Long is a Republican]

My brother is in the military and actually does have contact with some officers and commanders and he's said that the gist of what they say is usually that they shouldn't be in the military during the transition process. After it, sure, but not during it.

[Calthrina950]

Transgender soldiers have served America in every war and peace since 1775. Sad that Republicans want to turn the military into a social experiment that excludes them.

I know about Klinger during Korea, but what??

Echoing this. I've read about the instances of crossdressing soldiers (i.e. women disguising themselves as men) during conflicts such as the Revolutionary War and the Civil War, but I have never read anything about transgender soldiers prior to the middle of the twentieth century. I wouldn't be surprised if there were, but the percentage was probably very insignificant. It is still insignificant now, as transgenders comprise a small fraction (~15,000 out of ~1.5-2 million) of the current armed forces.

Crossdressing is not the same thing as transgender, as I think you are aware. However, before the late 20th century and hormone treatments, it would have been the only option for transgender Americans to fit into their preferred role in society.

I'm aware that crossdressing isn't the same. The cases I mentioned occurred at times when women were not allowed to serve in the military, and those who did had to falsify their identity, as well as their gender, in order to do so. But otherwise, I personally have never read about transgender soldiers at any time prior to the last century. Perhaps that may be so because our history books haven't discussed them. Nevertheless, this whole contention doesn't change the fact that they comprised, and continue to comprise, a small portion of the overall military forces.

[OSR stands with Israel]

Transgender soldiers have served America in every war and peace since 1775. Sad that Republicans want to turn the military into a social experiment that excludes them.

I know about Klinger during Korea, but what??

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.history.com/.amp/news/openly-gay-revolutionary-war-hero-friedrich-von-steuben


He wasn’t trans but he was an important LGBT officer  during the revolution

[JGibson]

Terrible decision by SCOTUS.

[Koharu]

"Know about Klinger." Uh, dude. Klinger is a fantastic character, but fake (M*A*S*H, as wonderful as it is, is not based on any real history, just set during the Korean war to assist in being commentary on the war going on at the time it was aired, Vietnam). Klinger is also very not trans, just someone who enjoys crossdressing (though he started it to get removed from the military), which is definitely not the same as being trans.

That said, as others have said, there have always been folks of LGBTQ+ sorts all around the world. However, in western-based societies, we have looked down on them and thus their stories are squashed and not well-preserved. It is difficult to know much about the life of everyday people prior to the Enlightenment, and even then we often don't know much. People who were of any sort of LGBTQ+ were constantly in fear for their lives and safety (and the safety of those who helped them), so chances were that they were not going to leave any sort of record.

There are plenty of histories in colonial America that very briefly brush on people being punished for wearing the "incorrect" clothing or being court-ordered to wear different clothing. Some of those could certainly be like Klinger and just enjoy cross-dressing, as that is actually not at all uncommon, but it's also likely that some of them were, in fact, trans.

With a quick internet search, the first verifiable story I could find in American history was that of Joseph (born Lucy) Lobdell, who was born in 1829. I am sure there are more that I'm not aware of as I am not at all experienced in LGBTQ+ history (my Christian college likely would have frowned on me looking into that topic), but just based on what we know scientifically today as well as historically about the past, there were likely just as many trans people then as there are now, percentage of the population-wise. They just either were forced to live as their birth sex or were forced into extremely secretive lives, or some combination of the two, unless, of course, they were lucky enough to be of noble birth, where they might have had a bit more flexibility. Philippe I, for example, was actually encouraged to dress in feminine styles and his preference for male partners was accepted by the court at large. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philippe_I,_Duke_of_Orl%C3%A9ans#Sexuality

I don't have the time to look into this today, but I can start some research and see if I can find some more documentation on the topic, though I doubt I will find much that will satisfy anyone truly doubting that trans folks existed and fought during early American wars, as again, their lives would have had to been lived out in extreme secrecy, and we don't have much documentation from regular folks who had nothing to keep secret.

[JGibson]

On the other hand they have decided not to hear the case on DACA, meaning Dreamers will be protected from deportation until the next term at the earliest.

Some good news there.

[Inmate Trump]

For anyone who disliked Trump but didn't vote for Hillary:

A lot of the blame for any decision made by the Supreme Court from 2017 on falls on your shoulders.

If, for example, abortion is more heavily restricted or made outright illegal across the country (an extreme, but I'm just saying), you are partially responsible.  Same goes for any other crazy ruling from 2017 onward.  You are to blame.

[Big Abraham]

I mean, I abhor the military and the notion of “service” therein, but so long as it exists as an institution, then any American deserves to be able to participate it in if they’re physically and mentally capable.

[President Johnson]

Disgraceful ruling. One more reason Susan Collins must be targeted for 2020 or forced to step down.

The good thing is that this is will be one of the things a Democratic president can rescind within his/her first weeks in office with the stroke of a pen.