Transgender Policy

[THRAWN]

I love this topic. People who have no expertise other than what they read on the internet all become experts when it comes up.

I ask again, since this topic has been discussed here for a decade, why has national been unable or unwilling to develop and field a policy to address it? Simple, really. Anybody?

I'm certainly no expert, I just know me and my beliefs, and I report what I've experienced.

The policy is out there, you may not like the policy or how it was/was not communicated, but it is there.  Not to mention the the climate it is changing- so to speak- in this area, so the policy needs to change and adapt.  If you are that concerned with the policy/ or the lack there of in your mind, what have YOU done to correct that?  Take into consideration all the viewpoints that must be addressed in said policy, as well as all the federal, state and local laws.  I'll wait, but I won't hold my breath.

And that's your problem. You're working off of beliefs and your limited scope experience, as opposed to the expert opinions of people that actually know what they're talking about. This is not a new issue, and in my career at multiple levels and in multiple roles, I've had to address this. Directly. Not as some rhetorical exercise on an internet message board. The policy that you're referring to, the legal ID policy, is adequate when addressing basic membership issues and  uniforms, but not quiet there when dealing with the issues that were brought up in the OP.

Deal more with fact, and less with emotion.

[Майор Хаткевич]

I love this topic. People who have no expertise other than what they read on the internet all become experts when it comes up.

I ask again, since this topic has been discussed here for a decade, why has national been unable or unwilling to develop and field a policy to address it? Simple, really. Anybody?

I'm certainly no expert, I just know me and my beliefs, and I report what I've experienced.

The policy is out there, you may not like the policy or how it was/was not communicated, but it is there.  Not to mention the the climate it is changing- so to speak- in this area, so the policy needs to change and adapt.  If you are that concerned with the policy/ or the lack there of in your mind, what have YOU done to correct that?  Take into consideration all the viewpoints that must be addressed in said policy, as well as all the federal, state and local laws.  I'll wait, but I won't hold my breath.

And that's your problem. You're working off of beliefs and your limited scope experience, as opposed to the expert opinions of people that actually know what they're talking about. This is not a new issue, and in my career at multiple levels and in multiple roles, I've had to address this. Directly. Not as some rhetorical exercise on an internet message board. The policy that you're referring to, the legal ID policy, is adequate when addressing basic membership issues and  uniforms, but not quiet there when dealing with the issues that were brought up in the OP.

Deal more with fact, and less with emotion.

Except where state law may contradict?

[THRAWN]

I love this topic. People who have no expertise other than what they read on the internet all become experts when it comes up.

I ask again, since this topic has been discussed here for a decade, why has national been unable or unwilling to develop and field a policy to address it? Simple, really. Anybody?

I'm certainly no expert, I just know me and my beliefs, and I report what I've experienced.

The policy is out there, you may not like the policy or how it was/was not communicated, but it is there.  Not to mention the the climate it is changing- so to speak- in this area, so the policy needs to change and adapt.  If you are that concerned with the policy/ or the lack there of in your mind, what have YOU done to correct that?  Take into consideration all the viewpoints that must be addressed in said policy, as well as all the federal, state and local laws.  I'll wait, but I won't hold my breath.

And that's your problem. You're working off of beliefs and your limited scope experience, as opposed to the expert opinions of people that actually know what they're talking about. This is not a new issue, and in my career at multiple levels and in multiple roles, I've had to address this. Directly. Not as some rhetorical exercise on an internet message board. The policy that you're referring to, the legal ID policy, is adequate when addressing basic membership issues and  uniforms, but not quiet there when dealing with the issues that were brought up in the OP.

Deal more with fact, and less with emotion.

Except where state law may contradict?

That might not be as big of an issue as it may seem. Use the common areas of the laws and generate policy from them. I'm not saying that there needs to be a complicated series of regs on the issue, but a directive policy is needed.

[Майор Хаткевич]

I'm not arguing that point. NHQ is taking steps towards that, so lets see what they come up with.

[THRAWN]

I'm not arguing that point. NHQ is taking steps towards that, so lets see what they come up with.

Agreed. My concern is the perception of an ever lengthening timeline...

[Storm Chaser]

I'm glad "no one" in this forum is trying to do activism or further an agenda.

[Майор Хаткевич]

I'm not arguing that point. NHQ is taking steps towards that, so lets see what they come up with.

Agreed. My concern is the perception of an ever lengthening timeline...

It took a long time to revise the Cadet Protection Policy. Comparatively it was more "straight forward".

[RogueLeader]

My take on it is, is that no matter what, at the end of the day, we need to protect and serve all of our members as best we can.  Unfortunately, we can not accommodate everyone.  If we "have" to make an accommodation for one person to make sure that he/she does feels "comfortable/safe/non-threatend", but it makes five others feel the opposite, how does that make sense?

For example, if Cadet A is biologically male, but identifies as female, and MUST (won't use a separate facility) use the female berthing/showering areas in order to feel positive/inclusive/safe, but that makes Cadets B, D N, and X feel threatened/unsafe/etc, should we be required to tell those Cadets to suck it up?  I don't think that's right either.

Should we make accommodations to the best of our ability, of course.  Should we be proactive in dealing with this, you gosh darn right.  Should we trash on persons feelings over someone else's, not a chance.  Should we prioritize the importance of one persons feelings over another groups, not necessarily. 

My personal feelings are what they are, and I can disagree with where things are headed.  That doesn't mean that I can't- and more importantly won't support all members of CAP, regardless of identity, orientation, gender, ethnicity, or religion.  Because I have and I will.

I made that argument as well and was told that it wasn't about people's feelings, it was about equality.

Feelings are tricky. There are people who feel blacks and whites shouldn't be together. Others think Mexicans or Muslims shouldn't be judges. Your (and my) rights end at the point where they infringe on the rights of others.

The issue is that in this case, the two are blurred, because those "rights" are based off of feelings.

I'm not arguing that point. NHQ is taking steps towards that, so lets see what they come up with.

Agreed. My concern is the perception of an ever lengthening timeline...

When an issue is moving as fast as this one has, particularly in the past few years, and months, the policy needs to be good- or though as "not enough".

[Storm Chaser]

Rights? Every member in CAP has the same rights. Why do we need a special policy?

[THRAWN]

Rights? Every member in CAP has the same rights. Why do we need a special policy?

Because this is not a black and white issue. And I'm not sure that "rights" is the correct term to use.

[Майор Хаткевич]

Rights? Every member in CAP has the same rights. Why do we need a special policy?

Because this is not a black and white issue. And I'm not sure that "rights" is the correct term to use.

According to some dignity is a feeling, and if a square peg doesn't fit in a round hole, we shouldn't make any square holes.

[Storm Chaser]

Do we have documented evidence that this is affecting our Cadet Programs or CAP as a whole?

[Chappie]

I'm not arguing that point. NHQ is taking steps towards that, so lets see what they come up with.

One thing that I can say -- having been a part of writing regulations/policies -- is that everything goes through a vetting process.  Historically...each area takes a look at what is submitted as to how it might affect them -- including CAP-USAF, etc.   And of course, legal looks it.   There is always a challenge as to how to make "one size fits all" given the size/dynamics of the various wings.   I know that we have had Chaplain Corps publications take up to 18 months or longer to get through the process.

[Майор Хаткевич]

Do we have documented evidence that this is affecting our Cadet Programs or CAP as a whole?

Documented? I'm sure. For our overall consumption? Probably not.

[Ned]

I have to say, giving equal time here, I'm just as concerned that this pending guest speaker will impact our program by introducing concepts of how CAP leaders should "mentor" these types of cadets.

Guest speakers come and go.  They don't impact our program, leaders like you do.  CAP has a lot of doctrine on mentoring.  We've been doing it a long time.  I don't see any changes coming down the road.

I went to her organizations website, and, reading through their rather strident activist literature, I find that they push educators and youth workers to encourage minor students in their disability and deviancy, even to the point where one of their published guides advocates concealing such encouragement from the students parents.

Jeff, I hope I'm misinterpreting that and that you don't consider our terrific GLTB cadets to be deviants or disabled.  At least I hope you don't treat them that way.

The point of a guest speaker is to bring in expert knowledge and experience from outside the organization.  Nobody wants to pay good money to hear cap leaders drone on about stuff we already know about accompanied by 110 poorly designed ppt slides.   

As you might surmise, essentially all of the experts in this area are folks who have formed opinions about their subject matter.  Sometimes strong opinions.  And given our lack of budget, they tend to be associated with community based organizations located close to NHQ or the meeting venue rather than UCLA professors who need air fare and large honorariums.

we don't sanction or "mentor" behaviors behind parents backs as a departure from our policy of transparency.

I'm not entirely sure what you mean here, but I would certainly agree that we do not mentor "behind parent's backs" in the sense of we do not get involved in family values or beliefs.  And while I rarely have had the experience of mentoring a cadet with Mom or Dad in the room, I wouldn't mind doing so.  IOW, I would never tell a cadet something that I would not be willing to say in front of their parents.  However, I do not brief Mom or Dad every time I mentor a cadet.

As I think I mentioned earlier in this thread, I honestly believe that all of us agree on essentially everything in this thread, but sometimes because of the sensitive nature of the subject matter semantic differences arise.

For example, I think all of us agree that our cadets should be treated respectfully, and that all are welcome to participate in (and benefit from) our program.  I also think we agree that GLB members, including cadets, have been in the program for many, many years, and that by and large our existing policies have provided whatever guidance is necessary.

The only new wrinkle here is developing policy to ensure that transgender cadets are welcomed and accommodated on the same basis as our other cadets.  And we will be talking about that, along with other things at the workshop.

Ned Lee

[vorteks]

Asserting "scientific consensus" is itself a political tactic meant to stifle debate.  Also, I didn't see any "science" about the topic of this thread in any of your cites.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biology_and_sexual_orientation#References


You can stick your head in the sand, put your fingers in your ears, close your eyes, and make noise, but it doesn't change anything.

You do realize "sexual orientation" is not the topic of this thread.....

Do you?

Though I know the activists want to frame it this way, I reject the idea that the issue being discussed here, which involves individual choices and behaviors, is on par with the struggles of women and minorities in history.[/quote]

I suggest you slow down to make sure you actually understand the meaning of the words you're reading.

[Pace]

This topic is starting a slow spin down the drain. Ease up folks.

[Майор Хаткевич]

Asserting "scientific consensus" is itself a political tactic meant to stifle debate.  Also, I didn't see any "science" about the topic of this thread in any of your cites.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biology_and_sexual_orientation#References


You can stick your head in the sand, put your fingers in your ears, close your eyes, and make noise, but it doesn't change anything.

You do realize "sexual orientation" is not the topic of this thread.....

Do you?

Though I know the activists want to frame it this way, I reject the idea that the issue being discussed here, which involves individual choices and behaviors, is on par with the struggles of women and minorities in history.[/quote]

I suggest you slow down to make sure you actually understand the meaning of the words you're reading.

I could suggest a number of things, but instead I'll just bow out before I regret saying something.

[arBar]

A few months ago I received a call from a teen advising me that she was transgendered Female to Male, and asking if she could join.  I advised her that:
1. Meetings are open to the public and she was welcome to come
2. We have non-discrimination policies in place and value equal opportunity
3. She would be free to join, and that nothing in the "program" per se would limit her pursuit of being an outstanding CAP cadet.

With that said, however, when it comes to some uniforms, bathroom use, overnight practices, etc. I was unaware of any policies and would have to check on it.  She planned to visit but never showed up.

I checked with Wing Legal who advised me that there were no policies in place but that there was something in the works at the national level.In the absence of a specific policy she would be recognized by her biological gender.  This was before the President's proclamation about bathrooms in schools.

Whether or not anyone embraces this ideologically we will have to have some policy in place soon and training in how to deal with it.

Also, FWIW, I decided that any dialogue about the matter needed to be by email or in person with a second senior member present.  That way there would be a paper trail and witness to any conversation about the matter.

[Ned]

I decided that any dialogue about the matter needed to be by email or in person with a second senior member present.  That way there would be a paper trail and witness to any conversation about the matter.

Good idea. 

Provided you do that with every other prospective cadet, of course.  Otherwise it might tend to look a little biased and unwelcoming.

Thank you for the work you do with our cadets.

Ned Lee