Transgender in the CF (merged)

[Jarnhamar]

Honestly, if we did away with this, and just had everyone sh*tting, shaving and sleeping togther, then it wouldn't matter if you were transgender, bigender, androgynous or dragonkin!

What happens when a CAF member argues that being forced to share bathroom accommodations with members of the opposite sex impinges on their religious beliefs? Do you think they can successfully argue that gender based bathrooms are a reasonable accommodation?
Truly I don't care the army ruined me of any modesty I had  ;D  It's only a matter of time before someone makes my silly dragon kin argument a real one.

Horseshit!  Your argument has nothing whatsoever to do with a legitimate debate about transgendered persons and the CF.  If there are individuals out there who so vehemently insist that they are something other than the species "Homo sapiens" that they want to be accommodated in their belief, the likelihood that they would be enrolled is slim;  the CF only enrols human beings (them being the only species currently acceptable - all else is property).  Likewise for individuals already serving.  The reason - because they are batshit crazy and, if legitimate in their assertion, should be evaluated for medical fitness to serve.

Is it really bat shit crazy?  Why? Lots of people think someone who is physically male but identifies as female (and demands to be accommodated as such) is crazy and yet we're seeing examples of it happening.
Bruce's prison example. The Alberta schools from the story I posted.

The CAF is a reflection of society and there are people out there who have two (or 3) genders and believe they're fairies or unicorns.
You think it's crazy now but in 10 or 15 years it could be common place. My argument is all theory and devils advocate but so was openly gay or trans members being allowed to serve 30 years ago.


If I were to actually have an issue at present it's individuals getting special accommodations to shower privately, use the washroom facilities on their own (ie other members not allowed in) or private/special sleeping areas etc..  And I've seen that first hand.

 

[Lumber]

What happens when a CAF member argues that being forced to share bathroom accommodations with members of the opposite sex impinges on their religious beliefs? Do you think they can successfully argue that gender based bathrooms are a reasonable accommodation?
Truly I don't care the army ruined me of any modesty I had  ;D  It's only a matter of time before someone makes my silly dragon kin argument a real one.
Is it really bat crap crazy? 

As an Atheist, I would say damn their religious sensibilities. The human body is the most natural thing that is human, and it shouldn't be something to be ashamed or afraid of. Modesty is a social construct that are not wanted nor required when serving your country. (maybe modesty isn't the right word, but I can't find a better one for "thinks opposite sexes seeing each other naked/sleeping in same rooms as the opposite sex/going to the bathroom in the same room as the opposite sex is shameful")

Do I think they can successfully argue for gender based bathrooms as areasonable accomodation. At the moment, I think yes, but I think things are changing. We had a co-ed bathroom on my last ship. The female officers were tired of having to walk all the way to the female Chief's heads, and the female officers heads were broken, so they said screw it. The bathrooms are individual stalls, and there is no urinal anymore, so why can't a female and a male play battleshits? They even started having showers in our heads. The only caveat was that only men or only women (not both) could be in the shower area of our heads at one time. But you could have a female officer showering while males were shaving or going to the bathroom 6 feet away. Could I see this happening at NDHQ? Not a chance, but, I've never been... Maybe the MEGA?

 

[Jarnhamar]

As an Atheist, I would say damn their religious sensibilities.

Damn their religious sensibilities  ;D  That wouldn't have flew with the conservatives at the helm. Now that the liberals are in power?  Those religious sensibilities just got a whole lot more important.

 

[cupper]

As an Atheist, I would say damn their religious sensibilities.

See, now you've done it. You've brought religion into the equation.

As an atheist I'd start demanding my own facilities so I didn't have to listen to someone invoking a deity when they are puking, or having conjugal self-relations.  [

 

[AirDet]

I usually avoid topics like this that can so easily go off the rails. However, I just wanted to point out that as military we judge people more by their actions than any other single trait. If someone conducts themselves professionally, they'll be treated thusly.

For example, I've sailed with a trans-gendered tech and a gay tech. They were both highly skilled and competent. We lived in very close quarters with them for up to 6 months at a time. Nobody on our det ever passed a negative statement about either of them.

The bottom line is that when we're in this uniform we're ALL the same. We're all part of the team.

I can't guarantee there won't be discrimination but we have processes in place to deal with those. With all the focus of Op Honour I hope that the few dinosaurs that remain would be wise enough to grow up or at least keep their opinion silent.

 

[OldSolduer]

I usually avoid topics like this that can so easily go off the rails. However, I just wanted to point out that as military we judge people more by their actions than any other single trait. If someone conducts themselves professionally, they'll be treated thusly.

For example, I've sailed with a trans-gendered tech and a gay tech. They were both highly skilled and competent. We lived in very close quarters with them for up to 6 months at a time. Nobody on our det ever passed a negative statement about either of them.

The bottom line is that when we're in this uniform we're ALL the same. We're all part of the team.

I can't guarantee there won't be discrimination but we have processes in place to deal with those. With all the focus of Op Honour I hope that the few dinosaurs that remain would be wise enough to grow up or at least keep their opinion silent.

Good post. FYI I have a family member who has trans gendered. That takes guts...and more courage than many of us could muster.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

The bottom line is that when we're in this uniform we're ALL the same. We're all part of the team.

In a perfect world and in recruiting videos, that might be true.

However, I am NOT the same as the POS in uniform who chose to do drugs, partake in kiddie porn, beat their dependants, steal and abuse their authority.  Uniform or not, we are all NOT the same, the uniform is likely the one thing we all have in common.

Let's stop pretending the world is all about puppy dogs and butterflies.

 

[George Wallace]

In a perfect world and in recruiting videos, that might be true.

However, I am NOT the same as the POS in uniform who chose to do drugs, partake in kiddie porn, beat their dependants, steal and abuse their authority.  Uniform or not, we are all NOT the same, the uniform is likely the one thing we all have in common.

Let's stop pretending the world is all about puppy dogs and butterflies.

AH!  I see you fell for all that "Diversity Training" that came out after "SHARP Training".  You know the one.  Where they whole unit got to watch a video on "X's" and "Y's" and how everyone is different.  Training to show how we were all different.  It only takes the tiniest bit of common sense to know that we are all different.  However, that training was "divisive" as opposed to what we in the military needed -- "inclusive".  What we all have in common is more important.  We all know that the "world is not all puppy dogs and butterflies".  The CAF is about teamwork, not individualism. 

Does the CAF have "problem children"?  Like every other segment of Canadian society; yes.  Is that the question being discussed in this thread?  No.

 

[Jarnhamar]

AH!  I see you fell for all that "Diversity Training" that came out after "SHARP Training".  You know the one.  Where they whole unit got to watch a video on "X's" and "Y's" and how everyone is different.  Training to show how we were all different.  It only takes the tiniest bit of common sense to know that we are all different.  However, that training was "divisive" as opposed to what we in the military needed -- "inclusive".  What we all have in common is more important.  We all know that the "world is not all puppy dogs and butterflies".  The CAF is about teamwork, not individualism. 

Does the CAF have "problem children"?  Like every other segment of Canadian society; yes.  Is that the question being discussed in this thread?  No.

As an organization we're still very much driven by gender distinctions.

Speaking of the question George(or anyone really) , what do you think? Should a Canadian Forces member who is physically male but identifies their gender as female be allowed;

1. to use female washrooms,open showers and sleeping quarters?
2. be given the bra allowance?
3. wear female DEUs?
4. hypothetically speaking- be allowed to fall under female standards of fitness if we ever move back to gender based fitness scores?

 

[Poppa]

I think that if the individual in question has been diagnosed with gender identity disorder (GID) or gender dysphoria and are in the process of transitioning then yes they should be treated as their identified gender.
Just seems like the right thing to do....to me.

 

[George Wallace]

As an organization we're still very much driven by gender distinctions.

Speaking of the question George(or anyone really) , what do you think? Should a Canadian Forces member who is physically male but identifies their gender as female be allowed;

1. to use female washrooms,open showers and sleeping quarters?
2. be given the bra allowance?
3. wear female DEUs?
4. hypothetically speaking- be allowed to fall under female standards of fitness if we ever move back to gender based fitness scores?

It isn't a question at all.  There are actually a large number of CAF personnel who fall into this category, and they already have points 1, 2 and 3.  Point 4 would follow suit if it were to be applied.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

As an organization we're still very much driven by gender distinctions.

Speaking of the question George(or anyone really) , what do you think? Should a Canadian Forces member who is physically male but identifies their gender as female be allowed;

1. to use female washrooms,open showers and sleeping quarters?
2. be given the bra allowance?
3. wear female DEUs?
4. hypothetically speaking- be allowed to fall under female standards of fitness if we ever move back to gender based fitness scores?

And to add to it, what about the other females on the course/exercise/in the unit/whatever.  What if one or more of them are uncomfortable with a male (biologically) who identifies as female?  What are their rights?  None?  Some?

It isn't just about the transgender person.  We are supposed to care about the welfare of all our subordinates.

 

[PMedMoe]

It isn't a question at all.  There are actually a large number of CAF personnel who fall into this category, and they already have points 1, 2 and 3.  Point 4 would follow suit if it were to be applied.

But I believe those people have undergone complete SRS and were closely monitored while doing so.

I have no problem with trans or gay people, having friends in both categories.

I think the question (in this thread anyway) is where does the CF put people who identify as a certain gender, yet are not "equipped" as that gender?

I think there'd be problems either way.  Just my  :2c:

 

[Eye In The Sky]

AH!  I see you fell for all that "Diversity Training" that came out after "SHARP Training".  You know the one.  Where they whole unit got to watch a video on "X's" and "Y's" and how everyone is different.  Training to show how we were all different.  It only takes the tiniest bit of common sense to know that we are all different.  However, that training was "divisive" as opposed to what we in the military needed -- "inclusive".  What we all have in common is more important.  We all know that the "world is not all puppy dogs and butterflies".  The CAF is about teamwork, not individualism. 

Does the CAF have "problem children"?  Like every other segment of Canadian society; yes.  Is that the question being discussed in this thread?  No.

Actually, as a PRES mbr at the time, and having done SHARP, I refused to do the "Diversity Trg" when it was run at the unit.  I was tired of the PC mamby-pamby BS being stuffed down our throats at the time.

What is being discussed in this thread is an issue based on people.  Someone said 'we are all the same'.  I used examples to show that is not, in fact, true.

 

[Jarnhamar]

It isn't a question at all.  There are actually a large number of CAF personnel who fall into this category, and they already have points 1, 2 and 3.  Point 4 would follow suit if it were to be applied.

I could be wrong but I have my doubts that CF members who have a penis are openly showering with females or sleeping in female designated sleeping quarters?

PMedMoe that's exactly what I'm asking (thanks).  When I was reading about Bruce/Caitlin Jenner I was surprised to read that they still had a penis despite the other extensive surgeries they went through. I went on to read that it was very common for trans members not to fully transition hence my questions about accommodations and such.

 

[PuckChaser]

I went on to read that it was very common for trans members not to fully transition hence my questions about accommodations and such.

Which begs the question, if someone truly and fully believes they are the opposite gender inside their current body, why not make the complete transition? Then they can fully and completely live life as the other gender, and no one would even know.

 

[PMedMoe]

Which begs the question, if someone truly and fully believes they are the opposite gender inside their current body, why not make the complete transition? Then they can fully and completely live life as the other gender, and no one would even know.

Exactly.

 

[NSDreamer]

Which begs the question, if someone truly and fully believes they are the opposite gender inside their current body, why not make the complete transition? Then they can fully and completely live life as the other gender, and no one would even know.

I'm sure many of them want to. The process, from my understanding, is not fast, and takes a wait period to prove that this is what they want and not a fluke diagnosis or something along those lines, if you want I can look it up for you, but when a friend of mine back in university was applying for it they had to wait a lengthy period of time while on hormone therapy before a doctor would consider the operation.

 

[mariomike]

The process, from my understanding, is not fast, and takes a wait period to prove that this is what they want and not a fluke diagnosis or something along those lines, if you want I can look it up for you, but when a friend of mine back in university was applying for it they had to wait a lengthy period of time while on hormone therapy before a doctor would consider the operation.

Adding for reference,

Sex reassignment surgery
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_reassignment_surgery

 

[The Bread Guy]

I think the question (in this thread anyway) is where does the CF put people who identify as a certain gender, yet are not "equipped" as that gender?

Simple, but not easy - well summed up.

Which begs the question, if someone truly and fully believes they are the opposite gender inside their current body, why not make the complete transition? Then they can fully and completely live life as the other gender, and no one would even know.

Another good question, but as with any policy/rule, dealing with the 0% or 100% is easy - it's the 40 to 75%'ers that are tricky.