|
TheKennedys posted:I know we say this a lot because goons, etc, but honestly there is something very, very wrong with that man's brain and it's only a matter of time before he has either a total narcissistic meltdown or ends up shooting squirrels out the window with a high-powered rifle because he thinks they're ISIS insurgents how did you find out my cunning highly trained gay squirrel plan
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2017 05:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 02:11 |
|
|
Admiral Zukunft, Commandant of the Coast Guard posted:I reached out personally to Lt. Taylor Miller, who was featured on the cover of The Washington Post last week. If you read that story, Taylor's family has disowned her. Her family is the United States Coast Guard. And I told Taylor, 'I will not turn my back. We have made an investment in you, and you have made an investment in the Coast Guard, and I will not break faith.   http://www.military.com/daily-news/2017/08/01/commandant-i-will-not-break-faith-transgender-coast-guardsmen.html?variant=mobile.amp
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2017 19:30
|
|
|
The coast guard is pretty good folks. I spent a summer a couple of years back working for their historian's office in DC and it was very rewarding work. And the attractive dudes in dress pants that really showed off their butts did not hurt.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2017 20:11
|
|
|
TheKennedys posted:I know we say this a lot because goons, etc, but honestly there is something very, very wrong with that man's brain and it's only a matter of time before he has either a total narcissistic meltdown or ends up shooting squirrels out the window with a high-powered rifle because he thinks they're ISIS insurgents Reading articles about Trump from decades ago it seems like he's always been this messed up, or at least since the mid 80s or so.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2017 00:16
|
|
|
AlexJade posted:I can't imagine the head of the joint chiefs of staff is very happy right now considering his pro-LGBT views. I expect that's part of why the Joint Chiefs' official opinion on the matter is "gently caress You, a Tweet is not a legal order."
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2017 02:25
|
|
|
Liquid Communism posted:I expect that's part of why the Joint Chiefs' official opinion on the matter is "gently caress You, a Tweet is not a legal order." Also helps that Trump lied about talking to anyone at the Pentagon about banning transgender people from the military (he hadn't) and apparently has not actually made any moves towards actually trying to force the military to ban transgender people. Trump having the attention spam of a gnat is for once working out in the LGBT community's favor.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2017 02:56
|
|
|
His attention span is only slightly smaller than his hands, or slightly larger than his endowment.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2017 03:40
|
|
|
Well poo poo  Trump’s Trans Military Ban Now Policy quote:President Donald Trump may be on a 17- day vacation but his White House has been scrambling to hand him a “win” by the time he returns. Trump’s tweets last week announcing a ban on transgender individuals serving openly in the U.S. military was turned into a “guidance” policy for implementation that passed muster with the White House Counsel’s office Friday night. Approved by Trump, the new policy is expected to be now delivered into the hands of Defense Secretary Jim Mattis, who has been quiet on the issue with approximately 15,000 trans servicemembers under his command.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2017 17:11
|
|
|
loving garbage
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2017 17:16
|
|
|
In this case, as in so many before, it's going to prove harder to roll back protections and remove rights than I think the administration fully understands. (I'd say "than Trump understands" but he's basically a senile racist grandpa randomly firing lovely neurons at this point.) Once people serve alongside out trans people, they build ties of empathy and understanding that aren't so easy to sever. I think if the administration wants to hurt trans people they're more than capable of doing it, but their regressive fifties status quo has already taken some damage.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2017 17:43
|
|
|
Which laws handle lgbt protections in the US right now? ENDA never passed and Barney Frank took his ball home when HRC finally gave up on being the only LGBT org to support the transphobic version of it so employment and housing is still an issue. Gay marriage, sodomy laws and the Matt Shepard act is afaik the only stuff that really exists, and fair weather allies are probably not going to care overly much after a few months. A lot of existing protections come from federal government directives that don't have a law backing them still. It will be a lot of noise at first but I expect things to squeak the same way the travel ban happened.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2017 18:07
|
|
|
Quorum posted:In this case, as in so many before, it's going to prove harder to roll back protections and remove rights than I think the administration fully understands. (I'd say "than Trump understands" but he's basically a senile racist grandpa randomly firing lovely neurons at this point.) Once people serve alongside out trans people, they build ties of empathy and understanding that aren't so easy to sever. I think if the administration wants to hurt trans people they're more than capable of doing it, but their regressive fifties status quo has already taken some damage. Military leadership is also highly likely to resist this move. The White House and the Pentagon do not want the same things, and it'll be interesting to see if the Pentagon throws its weight into dragging its heels.
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2017 20:06
|
|
|
Cythereal posted:Military leadership is also highly likely to resist this move. The White House and the Pentagon do not want the same things, and it'll be interesting to see if the Pentagon throws its weight into dragging its heels. Yeah, I'm pretty sure the pentagon's gonna do exactly that. They don't want this and have made it clear they don't want this, and are making an active effort to stay as clear as possible of Trump's mess. Doesn't mean some lower level asshats won't try to start trouble now that Trump is encouraging them (which will suck for anyone that runs into it), but I suspect they'll find a good chunk of the higher brass is incredibly non-sympathetic if for no other reason than because they HATE Trump and hate doing anything he wants them to do.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 03:29
|
|
|
Alkydere posted:Yeah, I'm pretty sure the pentagon's gonna do exactly that. They don't want this and have made it clear they don't want this, and are making an active effort to stay as clear as possible of Trump's mess. No one wanted this. The republicans wanted an EO to stop money going to gender reassignment surgery for the military so they had better cover negotiating a budget with the house freedom caucus. Still a super lovely thing to do, but not even the same ballpark as this. Trump just went full ahead with a blanket ban.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 04:08
|
|
|
Couldn't the military just say " Yep, we're gonna go do this but we need to figure out the right way and that's going to take at minimum 7 years"
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 04:50
|
|
|
Hollismason posted:Couldn't the military just say " Yep, we're gonna go do this but we need to figure out the right way and that's going to take at minimum 7 years" If and when the brass decides to stone wall they'll be subtler about it but with a similar result.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 04:58
|
|
|
GreyjoyBastard posted:If and when the brass decides to stone wall they'll be subtler about it but with a similar result. And they'll say that after a couple of years of sending the paperwork back to the White House and insisting they fill it out properly.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 05:00
|
|
|
I honestly doubt the pentagon would stonewall that much if it became official, full fledged policy. There were shortages of arabic and persian translators throughout the war on Terra and they never seemed to try particularly hard to retain people with the skills who happened to be in some way undesirable.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 05:06
|
|
|
The issue is more a matter of them being obligated to do it by someone most of them detest; the brass is more than happy to discriminate against people they don't like, but they're never happy when the civilian authority tries to micromanage them. What would be more telling is how hard they try to fight the inevitable discrimination lawsuits, or if they make the white house do it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 05:09
|
|
|
There's also the logistical nightmare of trying to discharge thousands of soldiers in the field (some in command positions) during the middle of an on going war. Its definitely not altruism but sometimes anger and resentment can be better motivators. Like everything else Trump has done so far he probably didn't think this plan through and left it wide open for a counter attack.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 05:13
|
|
|
Agnosticnixie posted:I honestly doubt the pentagon would stonewall that much if it became official, full fledged policy. There were shortages of arabic and persian translators throughout the war on Terra and they never seemed to try particularly hard to retain people with the skills who happened to be in some way undesirable. Didn't the top brass testify to Congress on the repeal of DADT on the basis that enough of the linguists were gay that them getting randomly booted out was hurting readiness? I get it was self-serving, but the brass did stand up to Congress and got concessions for LGB service members from them.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 13:12
|
|
|
rkajdi posted:Didn't the top brass testify to Congress on the repeal of DADT on the basis that enough of the linguists were gay that them getting randomly booted out was hurting readiness? I get it was self-serving, but the brass did stand up to Congress and got concessions for LGB service members from them. They did. From what I've heard from serving family members, our military leadership intensely dislikes Trump to begin with for being erratic, volatile, and having no clear foreign policy or vision for the future. The military likes it when they have a clear understanding of what to expect from the president and what the president expects from them. Trump is... not that.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2017 14:37
|
|
|
They probably are little annoyed at the president for just blurting our state secrets to foreign leaders for no apparent reason
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2017 01:46
|
|
|
From what I understand the Military had quite the brain drain because of DADT and were not very happy about it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2017 01:52
|
|
|
It's looking more likely that Australia is having a vote on marriage equality. It is meaningless and merely gives hate groups a national stage to spread anti-gay propaganda.quote:A planned postal vote on equal marriage in Australia will not be subject to rules that prohibit malicious or misleading campaign materials. Public opinion in Australia strongly favors marriage equality.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2017 20:53
|
|
|
Need some good news? The Texas House of Representatives has ended its special session without passing an anti-transgender “bathroom bill.” The Human Rights Campaign tweeted early this evening that the session is over and the legislation is dead.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2017 03:17
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/AynRandPaulRyan/status/900518445141315584The Wall Street Journal posted:The White House memo also directs the Pentagon to deny admittance to transgender individuals and to stop spending on medical treatment regimens for those currently serving, according to U.S. officials familiar with the document. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2017 01:51
|
|
|
Its a few days ago, but looks like Mattis is stalling the transgender nonsense for now, and leaving current policy in place. So there is that. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/mattis-transgender-troops-can-stay-until-study-complete_us_59a6aa8ee4b00795c2a2e45c
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2017 15:55
|
|
|
GhostBoy posted:Its a few days ago, but looks like Mattis is stalling the transgender nonsense for now, and leaving current policy in place. So there is that. uh, not really? he's following orders as directed
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2017 16:48
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/ZackFord/status...ame_sex_couples
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2017 02:45
|
|
|
I assume other posters have already heard about the circus-go-round with Manning? http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/09/15/551151607/harvard-withdraws-fellowship-invitation-to-chelsea-manning Honestly, what a joke of an institution.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 19:16
|
|
|
Mike Pompeo is a piece of poo poo, but he does make some salient points. Chelsea betrayed the very oath she took when she enlisted. Granted she had a rough patchy time and had a lot of trouble with the Army and her leadership, that doesn't justify the actions she took nor did she do anything heroic by dumping hundreds of thousands of state department cables etc. I do think she has important things to say about the lovely hand that trans people and especially trans-servicemembers experience. Harvard inviting her to speak with regards to these topics is valid and well justified and I'm glad they're having her speak, but she should not be glorified for her actions that led to her conviction.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 19:35
|
|
|
This WashPo op-ed sums it up for me:quote:When offering future invitations, sure. Harvard has a bad habit of inviting buzzy figures to be IOP fellows not because of their sterling commitment to the values the school holds dear but because of prestige or publicity. Establishing an explicit set of principles — one that distinguishes between the Mannings and Spicers of the world — to determine whether someone deserves the designation of fellow is not a bad idea. Neither is laying out exactly what statement Harvard makes when it invites someone to spend time at the Institute of Politics.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 19:58
|
|
|
Yeah that's a pretty good article. I also think it was chickenshit of harvard to offer and then yank a title, but i'm glad she's getting to speak still regardless.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 20:01
|
|
|
Leaking war crimes evidence is extremely good and should be encouraged.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 20:55
|
|
|
Shukaro posted:Leaking war crimes evidence is extremely good and should be encouraged. I agree, but the fact that video got published as a part of the dump is more an outlier compared to the voluminous amount of other poo poo she dumped as well. If she had only dumped stuff like the collateral murder video, I'd preach right along with you. The fact that there was one or two good things exposed does not remotely make up for the sheer amount of damage done otherwise. Leaking one or two pertinent things makes you a whistleblower. Indiscriminately dumping uncurated gigs of classified data that happens to have a few whistleblowing items in it does not. Mr. Nice! fucked around with this message at 21:03 on Sep 15, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 21:00
|
|
|
yeah, like, i think it reflects pretty badly on your organization to make a fellowship offer to a prominent political figure only to immediately reverse it when some bigwig objects and pretend like you didn't understand exactly what you were doing by offering it in the first place i don't really care about whether manning 'deserves' the honor. harvard iop has made it pretty clear by this exchange that it really isn't one regardless, imo
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 21:06
|
|
|
AriadneThread posted:yeah, like, i think it reflects pretty badly on your organization to make a fellowship offer to a prominent political figure only to immediately reverse it when some bigwig objects and pretend like you didn't understand exactly what you were doing by offering it in the first place Exactly, if they didn't want such a thing they shouldn't have even made the offer. There was no point to that whole fellowship offer/fellowship retraction thing.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 22:54
|
|
|
Sessions has rescinded protections for Trans individuals from Workplace Discrimination http://www.thenewcivilrightsmovemen...+Discrimination
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2017 23:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 02:11 |
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Sessions has rescinded protections for Trans individuals from Workplace Discrimination gently caress you you evil keebler elf
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2017 00:04
|
|