Military people, how might the introduction of transgender people affect the readiness and lethality of the force?

1. POTUS Trump has decided to reverse FPOTUS Obama's decision on Trans-folk in the military. This is sure to cause a bit of reaction. I know that with most of reddit being rather Left leaning politically, the reaction here will likely be harsh criticism, so I wanted to chime in with some info/feedback on the topic many here probably have never seen/heard before. My views on this are mixed, being a full supporter of all citizens rights, while also having served over 2 decades in military service. Commentary about trans folks being unable to do the jobs/being a hindrance to doing jobs is as damn silly as the same arguments some people used to use for gays in the military (and have since been totally proven wrong). That said, the point about the medical issues are valid and reasonable reasons to bar medically Trans folk from service. Surgical support discussions aside as a separate topic, the ongoing medical/medicine support for transitioned people could be easily compared to Asthma and Diabetes... both conditions also barred from service. When deployed, we often end up in situations where medical care is scarce if at all available. Meds usually need to be carried, so refrigeration isn't often available. Meds can end up damaged and lost. A troop who has their allergy meds crushed while rolling for cover just ends up sniffling a bit for a while. A troop who suddenly lost access to their albuterol/insulin/transitional meds might actually end up facing serious health problems leading to them not being able to perform their duties, thereby putting their unit's mission at risk. So, because of that, those with pre-existing conditions are barred from service and those who develop the issue in service face medical review boards and are usually quickly discharged.Roughly 9% of the US population has diabetes. Roughly 8% have Asthma. Roughly half of 1% of the US population identify as Trans. Does it suck for all of them IF they even wanted to serve in active duty that they cannot? Sure it does, but the lives of all the other military members being put at risk due to mission failure isn't worth being "fair". The military isn't about being "fair". There is a 100+ page manual listing all the medical conditions barred from military service. Meanwhile, all of those folks are freely able to enter almost any other Federal service jobs, including many Fed-Civilian in the DoD jobs where they work right alongside military members (not all places obviously), getting most of the same benefits.
   — PirateKilt


2. Active Service Army here, I'm in complete support of having transgender people in the military. However, the only disqualifying factor I would have is to not be medically dependent. Having a consistent schedule of treatment is simply not realistic in the military environment. As long as they are willing to make the temporary sacrifice of putting off those treatments (if in fact they plan on doing the medical changes at all), I'm all for it. Though for clarity's sake, this is not an introduction of transgender troops. They were already introduced, this is rescinding the previous introduction. We greensuiters were already trained on Transgender Tier 2 and 3 depending on echelon.
   — Yococoyie


3. British Ex-Forces, so not my military. I'd be inclined to have individual assesments. Are you a desk jockey? You can probably do your job just fine. Are you involved in combat? I'd say there's a distinct possibility for someone undergoing such dramatic mental and physical change to have serious issues. 100% physically and mentally sound individuals can come out of service as train wrecks, let alone someone in the process of changing gender.
   — BEEFFLAP






4. Risky comment of the day... Prepare your downvotes. The military isn't just some job. It consumes your entire life when you are enlisted. It's not the place to be if you are confused, depressed, struggling with mental or emotional issues, etc. And the military is not known to offer good support in those areas. I'm not saying that being trans is any of those things. But making a transition or post transition is a very difficult process that is made easier by the love, support and understanding of those around you. The military isn't going to be an ideal place because the focus isn't ever on the individual but always on the squad, company, unit, branch, etc. Selfless Service is one of the major tenets of being in the military. Trans people are not selfish. But being trans is an internal process that shouldn't be taken lightly, nor have any other considerations thrown on top of it. I think being and defining one's transition is too important to have something like the military thrown at it. Especially when the military cannot provide the kind of medical and psychological help that is needed for that process. The military can't help vets with PTSD, what makes people think that it would be a safe environment for trans people? I'm an army veteran and pro LGBT. And I've seen when units reach a standstill because of problems with just a few soldiers: mental, physical, discipline, or otherwise. The military just isn't equipped for adversity. It's meant to run as a machine with all cogs acting in more or less the same manner.
   — chugmilk


5. I have a few questions on the actual POTUS ruling. 1. Is he saying, no transgender in ANY aspect of the military? Even non combat roles? That's stupid. 2. Or is he just saying we don't want to pay for meds? Because that leads to more questions. It's one thing if you think the VA shouldn't cover transitioning. That's a whole different debate. If its that it doesn't want to cover meds while on deployment... well I want more information on what that entails. Do all transgender people take meds (hormones and others?) if they do, what happens to them when they stop? Like another poster mentioned, if a solider loses insuliin or an inhaler, that can be life threatening. That's why we don't allow diabetics or asthma soldiers. If they lose allergy meds, they will be uncomfortable, but its not that big a deal. Is being off of transition meds more comparable to that? You're definitely not at 100% combat effectiveness if your nose is stuffed and eyes are itchy. But we allow it.
   — beepboop27


6. I served in the Army 1967- 1973 so maybe my views are outdated (trannies in the Army wasnt even considered a possibility back then, hell we didnt have gays then) but in modern terms, they shouldnt be let in. As a previous post said, around 15% of the population has asthma or diabetes and they cant join. I knew a kid who was a huge sports star in high school, star hockey player, but couldnt join the Marines because he had asthma (with symptoms that last showed when he was maybe 3). But then 1% of the population who have hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of medical issues, and before transition suffer from all the issues related to being "in the wrong body" get to join because of gay rights? The military is not a social experiment. We let black men in because there is no difference between a black man and a white man. We let gay men in because there is no difference between a gay man and a straight man. But there is a difference between a man and a woman wanting to be a man. I guess if a woman has already gotten the surgery, if they can keep the standards, they can stay, but if not, tough luck. I'd rather have an efficient military than an "inclusive" one.
   — Hillbilly_Heaven