How to handle TRANSGENDER Cadet: biology or choice?

Started by RNOfficer, February 03, 2016, 10:23:14 PM

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

RNOfficer

Sooner or later we will have to face the issue of how to treat the membership of transgenders. Should they be enrolled according to their biological sex or their gender choice?

Note that in California, and perhaps other states, discrimination against transgenders is unlawful. Apparently this law also covers non-profits like the CAP. In short, an individual is entitled to wear the uniform of his or her GENDER CHOICE.

In addition, an organization is required to prevent harassment based upon gender choice.

http://transgenderlawcenter.org/issues/know-your-rights/faq-the-gender-nondiscrimination-act

Also note that, for example,  the Girl Scouts have accepted boys that identify as girls under certain circumstances.

"Placement of transgender youth is handled on a case-by-case basis, with the welfare and best interests of the child and the members of the troop/group in question a top priority," the organization said on its website. "That said, if the child is recognized by the family and school/community as a girl and lives culturally as a girl, then Girl Scouts is an organization that can serve her in a setting that is both emotionally and physically safe."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2016/02/02/transgender-girl-scout-stands-up-to-bully-who-wouldnt-buy-cookies-from-a-boy-in-a-dress

Also the FAA no longer includes transgender as a "mental illness"

http://blogs.mprnews.org/newscut/2016/01/to-faa-transgender-pilots-no-longer-have-a-mental-illness/

NIN

Quote from: RNOfficer on February 03, 2016, 10:23:14 PM
Sooner or later we will have to face the issue of how to treat the membership of transexuals (aka transgenders). Should they be enrolled according to their biological sex or their gender choice?

I suppose you know this, but transgender and transsexual are two rather different terms.
Darin Ninness, Col, CAP
I have no responsibilities whatsoever
I like to have Difficult Adult Conversations™
The contents of this post are Copyright © 2007-2024 by NIN. All rights are reserved. Specific permission is given to quote this post here on CAP-Talk only.

RNOfficer

Thank you for pointing out that I misused "transexual".

http://www.medicaldaily.com/what-difference-between-transsexual-and-transgender-facebooks-new-version-its-complicated-271389

topic title should be Re: "How to handle TRANSGENDER Cadet: biology or choice?" OP has been modified appropriately.

Ned

We've had several threads on this sensitive and potential divisive subject.  And CAP has multiple members (both cadet and senior) who identify as transgender.  Current CAP policy is to use the "legal gender" of the member, based on the state of residence.  That policy is currently under active review and may (like any CAP policy) change.

It is certainly a topic worthy of discussion.  I'd ask all participants to be respectful of the views of others and keep in mind our Core Value of Respect.

Ned Lee
Col, CAP
National Cadet Program Manager

Pace

Quote from: Ned on February 03, 2016, 11:51:43 PM
It is certainly a topic worthy of discussion.  I'd ask all participants to be respectful of the views of others and keep in mind our Core Value of Respect.
My spidey sense feels the need to echo this.

Be constructive, please.
Lt Col, CAP

thebeggerpie

I can see one of the biggest issues is where do we place transgender cadets at Encampment? I know many parents would be freaked if they found out their 13 year-old daughter is going to be sleeping in the same room as a 17 year-old male-that-identifies-as-female.

If we isolate these cadets, isn't that hazing?

If we bunk them with cadets they physically match, regardless of their identification, isn't that hazing?

If we bunk them with cadets they don't physically match, but identify as, what problems with crop up there? Hazing? Legal issues? Mass withdrawal of cadets from the program?

I don't mean any disrespect to those of you that are Transgender, but these are RL concerns.

lordmonar

Hence the current policy of.......what are the legally identified as.

Not the worlds best answer as each state handles things differently....but at least that way it is "Someone Else's Problem".

As for what other parents now about.......and what they will get freaked out about.    I don't really care.  I got too much to worry about then other parent's prejudices.   I mean I know that there are some parents out there that may be freaked out if if little Johnny or Jenny are bunking with African Americans. 

Yes I know.....this is the 21st century and all.....but it is still out there.

And I just ain't got time for that.

YMMV
PATRICK M. HARRIS, SMSgt, CAP

LSThiker


lordmonar

Quote from: LSThiker on February 04, 2016, 06:25:45 AM
Quote from: lordmonar on February 04, 2016, 05:51:52 AM
And I just ain't got time for that.

Could not help it but:


That was what I was thinking about when I typed it!   

10 points to Griffendor!
PATRICK M. HARRIS, SMSgt, CAP

CAPDCCMOM

Let me begin by stating that I support the LGBT community. I also support every Cadet out there. Even if a Cadet is not a part of my Squadron, if they need help I am here for them. I will always strive to treat them with dignity and respect.

That being said. Like others out there I am concerned about loss of Cadets, parental fallout, and a sh**storm of paperwork. I don;t want to be face to face with Wing Legal. I am completely unsure what to do for an over night event. To force a Trangender cadet to bunk with males when they identify as female could be emotionally damaging to them. But bunking them with the females would make the others uncomfortable. Isolating said Cadet could be called an act of hazing.

I am not sure that the regulations we have at the moment are appropriate for these situations. But I am not sure what a good solution would be.

TheSkyHornet

Quote from: CAPDCCMOM on February 04, 2016, 03:18:15 PM
Let me begin by stating that I support the LGBT community. I also support every Cadet out there. Even if a Cadet is not a part of my Squadron, if they need help I am here for them. I will always strive to treat them with dignity and respect.

That being said. Like others out there I am concerned about loss of Cadets, parental fallout, and a sh**storm of paperwork. I don;t want to be face to face with Wing Legal. I am completely unsure what to do for an over night event. To force a Trangender cadet to bunk with males when they identify as female could be emotionally damaging to them. But bunking them with the females would make the others uncomfortable. Isolating said Cadet could be called an act of hazing.

I am not sure that the regulations we have at the moment are appropriate for these situations. But I am not sure what a good solution would be.

At the end of the day, CAP Regs say your legal birth gender is your CAP-recognized gender. That's the end of it for us at the ground level. It applies to senior members as well as cadets. If a cadet's parents have an issue with it, they can take it to group, wing, regional, and NHQ. We don't make the rules.

Yes, we can have an opinion, but it's not our place to state our opinions to the cadets or parents. Follow the regs or find another organization that accommodates your beliefs. It doesn't matter what your thoughts on it are. You signed a contract that says you can be kicked out for not following protocols.

Don't put yourself into a situation where it even becomes hazing, and telling someone to sit off to the side and not participate until they wear the proper uniform and meet the proper grooming standards isn't hazing of any sorts; it's enforcement of the rules. They get bunked with their gender. And if you want to make special accommodations and they turn them down, that's their choice. Until the regulations change, we follow the ones that currently exist. If there's a problem, take it up the chain of command.

THRAWN

Quote from: TheSkyHornet on February 04, 2016, 03:24:32 PM
Quote from: CAPDCCMOM on February 04, 2016, 03:18:15 PM
Let me begin by stating that I support the LGBT community. I also support every Cadet out there. Even if a Cadet is not a part of my Squadron, if they need help I am here for them. I will always strive to treat them with dignity and respect.

That being said. Like others out there I am concerned about loss of Cadets, parental fallout, and a sh**storm of paperwork. I don;t want to be face to face with Wing Legal. I am completely unsure what to do for an over night event. To force a Trangender cadet to bunk with males when they identify as female could be emotionally damaging to them. But bunking them with the females would make the others uncomfortable. Isolating said Cadet could be called an act of hazing.

I am not sure that the regulations we have at the moment are appropriate for these situations. But I am not sure what a good solution would be.

At the end of the day, CAP Regs say your legal birth gender is your CAP-recognized gender. That's the end of it for us at the ground level. It applies to senior members as well as cadets. If a cadet's parents have an issue with it, they can take it to group, wing, regional, and NHQ. We don't make the rules.

Yes, we can have an opinion, but it's not our place to state our opinions to the cadets or parents. Follow the regs or find another organization that accommodates your beliefs. It doesn't matter what your thoughts on it are. You signed a contract that says you can be kicked out for not following protocols.

Don't put yourself into a situation where it even becomes hazing, and telling someone to sit off to the side and not participate until they wear the proper uniform and meet the proper grooming standards isn't hazing of any sorts; it's enforcement of the rules. They get bunked with their gender. And if you want to make special accommodations and they turn them down, that's their choice. Until the regulations change, we follow the ones that currently exist. If there's a problem, take it up the chain of command.

What regs say that? I just looked in 39-2 and the only mention of gender is that it needs to be shown on your state issued ID.
Strup-"Belligerent....at times...."
AFRCC SMC 10-97
NSS ISC 05-00
USAF SOS 2000
USAF ACSC 2011
US NWC 2016
USMC CSCDEP 2023

CAPDCCMOM

"Just follow the regulations" or "I was just following orders" is a sure fire way to a lawsuit and/ or a criminal investigation. We are not bound to follow illegal or immoral orders. Given the current attitudes of the Supreme Court of the United States and most State Legislation, we could get into come serious issues here. Given the legal climate, above mentioned, these "regulations" or "orders" could be defined as both illegal and immoral.

TheSkyHornet

Quote from: CAPDCCMOM on February 04, 2016, 03:30:46 PM
"Just follow the regulations" or "I was just following orders" is a sure fire way to a lawsuit and/ or a criminal investigation. We are not bound to follow illegal or immoral orders. Given the current attitudes of the Supreme Court of the United States and most State Legislation, we could get into come serious issues here. Given the legal climate, above mentioned, these "regulations" or "orders" could be defined as both illegal and immoral.

We're not talking about lynching the kid behind the barn. We're talking about whether or not little androgynous Sam wears a male or female uniform and sleeps with the male or female cadets.

I would suggest taking it up with NHQ Legal and verifying the applicability of CAP regulations in your home state. Talk with your Wing HQ and figure out what happens in these situations. Your gender in accordance with the law, is your gender in CAP. We don't have the discretion to decide that for ourselves at the squadron level. If the State of Wyoming says Cadet Sam is male, then he wears a male uniform and bunks with the male cadets. If there's an issue with him bunking with the male cadets, you can make other arrangements. You cannot bunk him with the female cadets. If there's an issue of showering, make arrangements. If someone is going to cause an issue regarding discrimination or the inappropriateness of Sam showering with other cadets of the same legal gender, they can take it up with Legal.

Garibaldi

Quote from: CAPDCCMOM on February 04, 2016, 03:18:15 PM
Let me begin by stating that I support the LGBT community. I also support every Cadet out there. Even if a Cadet is not a part of my Squadron, if they need help I am here for them. I will always strive to treat them with dignity and respect.

That being said. Like others out there I am concerned about loss of Cadets, parental fallout, and a sh**storm of paperwork. I don;t want to be face to face with Wing Legal. I am completely unsure what to do for an over night event. To force a Trangender cadet to bunk with males when they identify as female could be emotionally damaging to them. But bunking them with the females would make the others uncomfortable. Isolating said Cadet could be called an act of hazing.

I am not sure that the regulations we have at the moment are appropriate for these situations. But I am not sure what a good solution would be.

I'm going out on a limb here, but let me preface this by saying I have, in my civilian and personal life, several friends who are trans-gendered, gay, bi, and even transsexual, so this pains me to say what I have to say. Some crudity follows. And I may or may not be banned or flamed for this. I'm prepared for either.

If you are born with certain plumbing, and have not had the operation to change said plumbing, you are still that particular gender. I knew a teen aged girl who literally taped her chest down, identified as a male, but could not afford the operation to change (she was 16, and did not live at home or attend school). She dressed like a boy, did absolutely nothing feminine, had a girlfriend, and identified in every single way as a male except for one thing. She was called out time and again when "he" asked that people refer to "him" by his male name. "Until you either grow one, or have one surgically attached, YOU ARE STILL A GIRL!" said one person. A lesbian, no less. This was about 8 or 9 years ago. She used private restrooms when possible, but when forced to choose between male and female restrooms, had to go into the female one. She was not in CAP.

I am very sympathetic to gender and sexually "confused" people. However, someone 12-17 years old, still dealing with the normal pressures of being a teenager, in addition to gender identity, should NOT be accommodated in such a fashion as sleeping and showering and toileting with members of the opposite sex while they try to figure out where they fit in the grand scheme of things.

I am in no way saying segregate a cadet based on sexual "identity". This would be wrong. There really is no good solution. Based on the news about teens fighting for the "right" to use the bathroom of the gender they identify with, I would say that most teens have a better handle on what they want in their bathroom. There are bathroom stall doors, the ability to dress and undress behind the shower stall curtain, people make the same noises in the bathroom regardless of their gender.

It's when people try to game the system that fairness falls apart. I can only envision a 14 year old "suddenly coming to the realization" that he is really a she inside, and wants to shower and live with the females at encampment, then suddenly "realizing I made a huge mistake" about a month later.

Counseling should be made available, not to try and change their mind about things. That's not our job. Counseling for anyone who feels that they are being....I don't know another word other than "violated" by someone they don't understand, how to cope with it, and so on.

It's a very touchy topic for everyone. Liberals will scream and cry about harassment, hazing, not having reasonable accommodations, and so on, while Conservatives will scream about having their "safe space" violated, "dem gay hommasekshuls ain't got no place in that CAP thing", and so on.

No easy solution. None. My PERSONAL slant on things is that use whatever bathroom you need to as a transgendered individual, laws permitting. I don't care. I'm not paying attention much to who is in the room while I go about my business. But it has no place in CAP. There really is no good or easy solution to how it would affect us.
Still a major after all these years.
ES dude, leadership ossifer, publik affaires
Opinionated and wrong 99% of the time about all things

THRAWN

Quote from: TheSkyHornet on February 04, 2016, 03:50:07 PM
Quote from: CAPDCCMOM on February 04, 2016, 03:30:46 PM
"Just follow the regulations" or "I was just following orders" is a sure fire way to a lawsuit and/ or a criminal investigation. We are not bound to follow illegal or immoral orders. Given the current attitudes of the Supreme Court of the United States and most State Legislation, we could get into come serious issues here. Given the legal climate, above mentioned, these "regulations" or "orders" could be defined as both illegal and immoral.

We're not talking about lynching the kid behind the barn. We're talking about whether or not little androgynous Sam wears a male or female uniform and sleeps with the male or female cadets.

I would suggest taking it up with NHQ Legal and verifying the applicability of CAP regulations in your home state. Talk with your Wing HQ and figure out what happens in these situations. Your gender in accordance with the law, is your gender in CAP. We don't have the discretion to decide that for ourselves at the squadron level. If the State of Wyoming says Cadet Sam is male, then he wears a male uniform and bunks with the male cadets. If there's an issue with him bunking with the male cadets, you can make other arrangements. You cannot bunk him with the female cadets. If there's an issue of showering, make arrangements. If someone is going to cause an issue regarding discrimination or the inappropriateness of Sam showering with other cadets of the same legal gender, they can take it up with Legal.

Interesting phrasing. You might want to drop if from your vocabulary and replace it with "billeted with".
Strup-"Belligerent....at times...."
AFRCC SMC 10-97
NSS ISC 05-00
USAF SOS 2000
USAF ACSC 2011
US NWC 2016
USMC CSCDEP 2023

NIN

Quote from: CAPDCCMOM on February 04, 2016, 03:30:46 PM
"Just follow the regulations" or "I was just following orders" is a sure fire way to a lawsuit and/ or a criminal investigation. We are not bound to follow illegal or immoral orders. Given the current attitudes of the Supreme Court of the United States and most State Legislation, we could get into come serious issues here. Given the legal climate, above mentioned, these "regulations" or "orders" could be defined as both illegal and immoral.

Not to put too fine a point on it, but you're probably not wrong if you're following the rules that are promulgated by the organization (which, presumably, were created with some degree of legal review to encompass most of the 50 states) and aren't doing anything that is not permitted by local law.

Example: If the CAP rules said "You can drive 70 mph in a CAP van!" (they don't, don't get all excited) and you were doing 70 in a 55 and got pulled over, you're wrong. :)

However, you have to be careful how you define "illegal" and "immoral."

Example: I had a lady for whom it was considered "immoral" for her to wear trousers (yeah, yeah, I know, I know).  Anybody remember the "BDU skirt" arguement?  <facepalm> 

Darin Ninness, Col, CAP
I have no responsibilities whatsoever
I like to have Difficult Adult Conversations™
The contents of this post are Copyright © 2007-2024 by NIN. All rights are reserved. Specific permission is given to quote this post here on CAP-Talk only.

Garibaldi

Quote from: NIN on February 04, 2016, 04:45:45 PM
Quote from: CAPDCCMOM on February 04, 2016, 03:30:46 PM
"Just follow the regulations" or "I was just following orders" is a sure fire way to a lawsuit and/ or a criminal investigation. We are not bound to follow illegal or immoral orders. Given the current attitudes of the Supreme Court of the United States and most State Legislation, we could get into come serious issues here. Given the legal climate, above mentioned, these "regulations" or "orders" could be defined as both illegal and immoral.

Not to put too fine a point on it, but you're probably not wrong if you're following the rules that are promulgated by the organization (which, presumably, were created with some degree of legal review to encompass most of the 50 states) and aren't doing anything that is not permitted by local law.

Example: If the CAP rules said "You can drive 70 mph in a CAP van!" (they don't, don't get all excited) and you were doing 70 in a 55 and got pulled over, you're wrong. :)

However, you have to be careful how you define "illegal" and "immoral."

Example: I had a lady for whom it was considered "immoral" for her to wear trousers (yeah, yeah, I know, I know).  Anybody remember the "BDU skirt" arguement?  <facepalm>

Yes. I do.

We also had a slight kerfuffle about a cadet wearing a religious head scarf in uniform a few months ago.

Our CD class last night was moral vs legal and ethical. The case study about the guy who "bought" his recruiter ribbon. Which led to a lively discussion about the ethics of a commander putting down their CAPID in the slot where it says "CAPID of the member most responsible for you joining CAP". Legal, yes. Ethical? No. Morally wrong? Maybe. Integrity issue? Certainly.
Still a major after all these years.
ES dude, leadership ossifer, publik affaires
Opinionated and wrong 99% of the time about all things

TheSkyHornet

Quote from: THRAWN on February 04, 2016, 04:30:22 PM
Quote from: TheSkyHornet on February 04, 2016, 03:50:07 PM
Quote from: CAPDCCMOM on February 04, 2016, 03:30:46 PM
"Just follow the regulations" or "I was just following orders" is a sure fire way to a lawsuit and/ or a criminal investigation. We are not bound to follow illegal or immoral orders. Given the current attitudes of the Supreme Court of the United States and most State Legislation, we could get into come serious issues here. Given the legal climate, above mentioned, these "regulations" or "orders" could be defined as both illegal and immoral.

We're not talking about lynching the kid behind the barn. We're talking about whether or not little androgynous Sam wears a male or female uniform and sleeps with the male or female cadets.

I would suggest taking it up with NHQ Legal and verifying the applicability of CAP regulations in your home state. Talk with your Wing HQ and figure out what happens in these situations. Your gender in accordance with the law, is your gender in CAP. We don't have the discretion to decide that for ourselves at the squadron level. If the State of Wyoming says Cadet Sam is male, then he wears a male uniform and bunks with the male cadets. If there's an issue with him bunking with the male cadets, you can make other arrangements. You cannot bunk him with the female cadets. If there's an issue of showering, make arrangements. If someone is going to cause an issue regarding discrimination or the inappropriateness of Sam showering with other cadets of the same legal gender, they can take it up with Legal.

Interesting phrasing. You might want to drop if from your vocabulary and replace it with "billeted with".

I originally said "bunked" and backspaced it. My error there, reading that line back after.  ;)

Quote from: NIN on February 04, 2016, 04:45:45 PM
Quote from: CAPDCCMOM on February 04, 2016, 03:30:46 PM
"Just follow the regulations" or "I was just following orders" is a sure fire way to a lawsuit and/ or a criminal investigation. We are not bound to follow illegal or immoral orders. Given the current attitudes of the Supreme Court of the United States and most State Legislation, we could get into come serious issues here. Given the legal climate, above mentioned, these "regulations" or "orders" could be defined as both illegal and immoral.

Not to put too fine a point on it, but you're probably not wrong if you're following the rules that are promulgated by the organization (which, presumably, were created with some degree of legal review to encompass most of the 50 states) and aren't doing anything that is not permitted by local law.

Example: If the CAP rules said "You can drive 70 mph in a CAP van!" (they don't, don't get all excited) and you were doing 70 in a 55 and got pulled over, you're wrong. :)

However, you have to be careful how you define "illegal" and "immoral."

Example: I had a lady for whom it was considered "immoral" for her to wear trousers (yeah, yeah, I know, I know).  Anybody remember the "BDU skirt" arguement?  <facepalm> 



Again, on this same point, that's why we have Legal officers. We're not all lawyers and don't have the expertise to debate this in court. If there's a legal challenge to the regulations as a civil rights violation, let the Legal department take that to civil court. To your point, Lt Col Ninness, ignorance of the law is no excuse for violating it. If a state says that transgender individuals are required to bunk in the same housing as the gender they identify with, then we can simply place them into another dormitory by themselves, and the problem is resolved. If that gets challenged as a hazing incident, that's when I would forward it up the chain and pass it off to the J.D.'s.

I think the best practice would be to discuss these matters with the cadet and parents at the time they join CAP. If the parents choose not to disclose the situation, and it doesn't come up until the cadets get their housing assignments at encampment, during a bivouac, or at a hotel for an overnight trip, then I would try to make reasonable accommodations at that time and we can discuss it further, time permitting.

I hate hypothetical situations, but that does give us some idea of looking into the future. Be prepared for this to come up and be ready to respond based on law and CAP regulations. You don't need to be prepared to go to court.

To Garibaldi's point:
Legal > Regulatory > Ethical

You are governed by law, restricted in your organizational actions by regulation, and behave by ethics.

ALORD

The State of California is using definitions to include 22 (So far) "sexual identities" in training teachers on the subject, so things can become enormously complicated rather quickly, especially as an individual can change their stated sexual identity "on the fly" so to speak. These identities are independent of XX Vs XY chromosomes since in addition to these somewhat nebulous definitions ( Some group the known number of "sexual Identities in numbers greater than 50) There are also three basic types of medical hermaphrodism, with any number of odd genetic mutations. When we define ourselves by any specific "Race" ( Really a misnomer, sine there is only currently one "Race" of Mankind; Homo Sapiens, although some of us carry a bit of Neanderthal) effectively, we are what we say we are, and no one has any standing to dispute our claim ( Indian Tribes maintain their own legal systems to define tribal status) If I claim to be an African American, no one has the authority to deny my claim ( In fact, every living human being is in fact of African Ancestry, if you just go back 100,000 years or so)

Knowing California's penchant for reducing any law to the absurd, it seems likely that CAWG at least, will accept any self-described sexual identity, irrespective of how specious the claim. I dread the day when we have to explain to the parents of little Cadet Cindy, that she was supervised on an overnight activity by, hypothetically, a self-identified, pre-op transsexual female with a set of XY Chromosomes and the traditional male accoutrement. The CPPT remains unaltered, but the definitions grow in scope so broad as to be meaningless.

Alabama, clearly, is not California. To the best of my knowledge (And I would not expect to be told about it if it occurred) CAWG has not had to deal with a Cadet or Senior with a Medical Marijuana card smoking the heathen devil-weed during CAP activities. In the case of a Federal Military base, that medical marijuana card is just an admission that you are a user of illegal substances, regardless of what the State Law may say. To the best of my knowledge, we have not disqualified applicants for membership due to the Illegal use of Marijuana. No one that I can point to is the actual controlling legal authority, or the "Court of Original Jurisdiction"  in these matters, but the facts seem, superficially, at least, to indicate that the obscurity of the law and policy has not actually presented us with any single problem requiring a legal test of the policy, and whether it is in conflict with USAF Values, Federal, or State Laws.

In the case of other military cadets, are the Military Academies accepting a transvestitive wearing of the uniform?