The military, transgender people, and Trump
Hi there. Jessica Orsini here, veteran of the first Gulf War who just happens to be a transwoman.
As anyone who has seen the news in the past five days knows, Pres. Trump made a statement via Twitter declaring that transgender people would not be allowed to serve the U.S. military in any capacity.
First things first. This isn’t an order. It’s a Twitter post (a series of them actually). And while the President has made a habit of making broad statements via Twitter, it doesn’t constitute an order.
Indeed, that’s what the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff made plainly clear: that until they receive a formal directive from the Secretary of Defense, the current policy — that transgender people currently in the military may serve openly — stands.
So did said Secretary, retired Gen. James “Mad-Dog” Mattis, who noted that he’d received no formal directive on this from the White House.
As for the President’s claims that he had consulted with “top generals” on this matter, there does not appear to be a top (or any other) general willing to testify to this. The Secretary of Defense, Joint Chiefs, and the Pentagon were all broadsided by the Twitter declaration.
Now, as to this business of whether or not transgender people can serve to good effect in the military…
…we already are. Several thousands of us, actually. By and large, this hasn’t been a problem for those actually serving; rather, certain politicians — notably those who have never served — have decided that it’s a problem.
The matter of cost has come up in this. Yet it’s worth noting that the highest estimate from the conservative Rand Corporation think tank of medical costs directly related to transgender soldiers is a mere tenth of what the Department of Defense spends each year on Viagra and other erectile dysfunction medication (and a fraction of a single Presidential visit to Mar-A-Lago). Then there’s the cost of replacing these soldiers. See, as fellow transgender veteran Carla Lewis has pointed out, the cost to recruit, train, and equip a marine was around $45,000 while the cost to do the same for a West Point graduate fighter pilot was around $340,000. If you were to assume they all cost the same as a marine, that would work out to $298,350,000 — roughly fifty times the high-end estimate to provide every transgender soldier in uniform today with full-spectrum surgery (as a side note, not every transgender person needs or wants surgery).
Then usually comes the fallback position regarding medication making it impractical for transgender people to serve. You’re welcome to tell the Israel Defense Forces — one of the toughest outfits in the world, and where transgender soldiers have served for twenty-four years now — that this is unworkable. Likewise the Netherlands (1974), Sweden (1976), Denmark (1978), Norway (1979), Australia (1992), Canada (1992), Czech Republic (1999), UK (2000), France (2000), Germany (2000), Estonia (2000), Finland (2000), Belgium (2003), Austria (2004), Spain (2005), and Bolivia (2010). And before someone raises the usual point about “but U.S. soldiers go on deployments!” I’ll point out that over half of the above have, since integrating transgender people into their militaries, have taken part in numerous U.N. and N.A.T.O. deployments.
The final excuse dragged out is the old unit cohesion and esprit de corps bit. This, you may remember, is the same one that was used to claim the incompatibility of gay and lesbian soldiers… and women in combat roles… and women in integrated units… and blacks in command positions… and blacks in integrated units.. and blacks at all… etc, etc. We know how that all worked out. Each and every time, there were minor grumblings for a very short period, and then smooth sailing. Indeed, after the announcement of open service and subsequent coming-out of thousands of transgender service members last year, there’s been barely a hint of trouble.
Mind, you need not take my word for much of the above. The Rand Corporation did a full study on the topic, and you can read it:
https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR1530.html
All of these rationales are window-dressing over the real underlying beef: that some folks just plain don’t like transgender people, and work to throw land mines in front of us at every turn. People like Rep. Vicky Hartzler (R-MO-9), who has done her level best to stop every advance by LGBT people throughout her career, and who tried to add a provision into the defense spending bill to prevent transgender soldiers from receiving medical care related to their transgender status — ostensibly due to the cost, but actually in line with her long history of supporting discrimination against transgender people. When she and other anti-LGBT legislators did not get their way with the House leadership, they went to the President and asked for his help… and in true keeping with his all-or-nothing approach to pretty much everything, he responded to their request for artillery support with a tac nuke.
How will this end? I don’t know. But it’s telling that the generals aren’t lining up in support of this. It’s telling that multiple Republican representatives and senators — including right-wing stalwart Sen. Orrin Hatch of Utah, of all people — are saying that the President’s decree is wrong. And it’s telling that despite this Sword of Damocles handing over their heads, the transgender people in uniform are continuing to report for duty and do their level best in defense of this country every day.